Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: The effect on postoperative outcomes

Thomas Hayward, Lloyd A. Hey, Lewis L. Newman, Francis G. Duhaylongsod, Katharine A. Hayward, James E. Lowe, Peter K. Smith

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

32 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background. Endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been promoted as a possible solution to the wound complications, incisional pain, and prolonged convalesce associated with open vein harvesting (OVH). The purpose of this study was to objectively compare the two techniques. Methods. One hundred patients were prospectively randomized to EVH or OVH. Primary outcomes were wound complications, pain (Medical Outcomes Study Pain Survey), and general health (SF-12). Secondary outcomes were operative times and patient preferences. Patients were assessed at hospital discharge, 3, and 6 weeks postdischarge. Results. No significant differences were detected in the primary outcomes: leg infection (p = 0.75), incisional pain (p = 0.74), physical health (p = 0.84), mental health (p = 0.47), and postoperative length of stay (p = 0.74). However, patient preference for EVH was highly significant (p <0.01). Conclusions. EVH does not demonstrate significant differences compared with OVH. This, coupled with higher operating room costs, should limit its use until clinical benefit is shown. However, strong patient preference and demand for EVH overshadow equivocal clinical outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2107-2111
Number of pages5
JournalAnnals of Thoracic Surgery
Volume68
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1999
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Saphenous Vein
Veins
Patient Preference
Pain
Wounds and Injuries
Operating Rooms
Operative Time
Health Surveys
Length of Stay
Leg
Mental Health
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health
Infection

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Hayward, T., Hey, L. A., Newman, L. L., Duhaylongsod, F. G., Hayward, K. A., Lowe, J. E., & Smith, P. K. (1999). Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: The effect on postoperative outcomes. Annals of Thoracic Surgery, 68(6), 2107-2111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(99)01181-9

Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest : The effect on postoperative outcomes. / Hayward, Thomas; Hey, Lloyd A.; Newman, Lewis L.; Duhaylongsod, Francis G.; Hayward, Katharine A.; Lowe, James E.; Smith, Peter K.

In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery, Vol. 68, No. 6, 12.1999, p. 2107-2111.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hayward, T, Hey, LA, Newman, LL, Duhaylongsod, FG, Hayward, KA, Lowe, JE & Smith, PK 1999, 'Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: The effect on postoperative outcomes', Annals of Thoracic Surgery, vol. 68, no. 6, pp. 2107-2111. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-4975(99)01181-9
Hayward, Thomas ; Hey, Lloyd A. ; Newman, Lewis L. ; Duhaylongsod, Francis G. ; Hayward, Katharine A. ; Lowe, James E. ; Smith, Peter K. / Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest : The effect on postoperative outcomes. In: Annals of Thoracic Surgery. 1999 ; Vol. 68, No. 6. pp. 2107-2111.
@article{c9714acaec7e4d5db0e6c42e391cc7d9,
title = "Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest: The effect on postoperative outcomes",
abstract = "Background. Endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been promoted as a possible solution to the wound complications, incisional pain, and prolonged convalesce associated with open vein harvesting (OVH). The purpose of this study was to objectively compare the two techniques. Methods. One hundred patients were prospectively randomized to EVH or OVH. Primary outcomes were wound complications, pain (Medical Outcomes Study Pain Survey), and general health (SF-12). Secondary outcomes were operative times and patient preferences. Patients were assessed at hospital discharge, 3, and 6 weeks postdischarge. Results. No significant differences were detected in the primary outcomes: leg infection (p = 0.75), incisional pain (p = 0.74), physical health (p = 0.84), mental health (p = 0.47), and postoperative length of stay (p = 0.74). However, patient preference for EVH was highly significant (p <0.01). Conclusions. EVH does not demonstrate significant differences compared with OVH. This, coupled with higher operating room costs, should limit its use until clinical benefit is shown. However, strong patient preference and demand for EVH overshadow equivocal clinical outcomes.",
author = "Thomas Hayward and Hey, {Lloyd A.} and Newman, {Lewis L.} and Duhaylongsod, {Francis G.} and Hayward, {Katharine A.} and Lowe, {James E.} and Smith, {Peter K.}",
year = "1999",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1016/S0003-4975(99)01181-9",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "68",
pages = "2107--2111",
journal = "Annals of Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "0003-4975",
publisher = "Elsevier USA",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest

T2 - The effect on postoperative outcomes

AU - Hayward, Thomas

AU - Hey, Lloyd A.

AU - Newman, Lewis L.

AU - Duhaylongsod, Francis G.

AU - Hayward, Katharine A.

AU - Lowe, James E.

AU - Smith, Peter K.

PY - 1999/12

Y1 - 1999/12

N2 - Background. Endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been promoted as a possible solution to the wound complications, incisional pain, and prolonged convalesce associated with open vein harvesting (OVH). The purpose of this study was to objectively compare the two techniques. Methods. One hundred patients were prospectively randomized to EVH or OVH. Primary outcomes were wound complications, pain (Medical Outcomes Study Pain Survey), and general health (SF-12). Secondary outcomes were operative times and patient preferences. Patients were assessed at hospital discharge, 3, and 6 weeks postdischarge. Results. No significant differences were detected in the primary outcomes: leg infection (p = 0.75), incisional pain (p = 0.74), physical health (p = 0.84), mental health (p = 0.47), and postoperative length of stay (p = 0.74). However, patient preference for EVH was highly significant (p <0.01). Conclusions. EVH does not demonstrate significant differences compared with OVH. This, coupled with higher operating room costs, should limit its use until clinical benefit is shown. However, strong patient preference and demand for EVH overshadow equivocal clinical outcomes.

AB - Background. Endoscopic vein harvest (EVH) has been promoted as a possible solution to the wound complications, incisional pain, and prolonged convalesce associated with open vein harvesting (OVH). The purpose of this study was to objectively compare the two techniques. Methods. One hundred patients were prospectively randomized to EVH or OVH. Primary outcomes were wound complications, pain (Medical Outcomes Study Pain Survey), and general health (SF-12). Secondary outcomes were operative times and patient preferences. Patients were assessed at hospital discharge, 3, and 6 weeks postdischarge. Results. No significant differences were detected in the primary outcomes: leg infection (p = 0.75), incisional pain (p = 0.74), physical health (p = 0.84), mental health (p = 0.47), and postoperative length of stay (p = 0.74). However, patient preference for EVH was highly significant (p <0.01). Conclusions. EVH does not demonstrate significant differences compared with OVH. This, coupled with higher operating room costs, should limit its use until clinical benefit is shown. However, strong patient preference and demand for EVH overshadow equivocal clinical outcomes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0033401438&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0033401438&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/S0003-4975(99)01181-9

DO - 10.1016/S0003-4975(99)01181-9

M3 - Article

C2 - 10616985

AN - SCOPUS:0033401438

VL - 68

SP - 2107

EP - 2111

JO - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

JF - Annals of Thoracic Surgery

SN - 0003-4975

IS - 6

ER -