Minimally invasive vein harvesting with the SaphLITE retractor system: is it really better?
The value of newly developed techniques for saphenous vein harvesting remains controversial. Which technique offers the most benefits is still unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the conventional vein harvesting through a continuous skin incision method with 2 less invasive methods and eva...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Heart surgery forum 2006-01, Vol.9 (1), p.E511-E514 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | E514 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | E511 |
container_title | The Heart surgery forum |
container_volume | 9 |
creator | Feyrer, Richard Seitz, Timo Strecker, Thomas Purbojo, Ariawan Fischlein, Theodor Weyand, Michael Harig, Frank |
description | The value of newly developed techniques for saphenous vein harvesting remains controversial. Which technique offers the most benefits is still unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the conventional vein harvesting through a continuous skin incision method with 2 less invasive methods and evaluate surgical advantages and postoperative results.
In this prospective study, 110 patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized into 3 groups: vein harvesting by standard continuous skin incisions (group I), conventional bridge technique (group II), and the SaphLITE retractor system (group III). Particular interest was paid to collecting intraoperative data and postoperative clinical results.
The ratio of vein length to incision length was 0.89 for group I, 1.9 for group II, and 3.3 for group III. Dissection time per centimeter of vein harvested and time for wound closure were found to be 1.23 min and 0.77 min for group I, 0.89 min and 0.57 min for group II, and 0.96 min and 0.46 min for group III. No wound infection was seen in either group; conduit quality, postoperative pain, and mobilization were similar. Hematoma and edema formation were less frequent in groups I and II. The best cosmetic results were seen in the SaphLITE group.
Less invasive vein harvesting techniques, especially with use of the SaphLITE retractor system, yield favorable clinical results, particular with respect to cosmetic appearance. Compared to the conventional approach, the SaphLITE method is suitable for routine vein harvesting because it has fewer complications and is easy and fast to perform. Because the bridge technique does not require special instruments, it has economic advantages. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1532/HSF98.20051032 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67615788</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>67615788</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-9538bcd3df3c905b007f771df80f10a6d347a8b79482f69daf63c9b89723fadd3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkD1PwzAQhi0EoqWwMiJPbCn-aGyHBaGqpZWKGFomhsiJbWKUj2K7Qf33GFrEdKfTc6_uHgCuMRrjlJK7xXqeiTFBKMWIkhMwxCkhCWOMnMYeZSKhKcYDcOH9B0KEEcLOwQCzCYrrfAjenm1rG1nXe2jbXnrba9hr28JKul77YNt3-GVDBUOl4Vpuq9VyM4NOByfL0Dno9z7o5h5aD22I89-kQoeg3cMlODOy9vrqWEfgdT7bTBfJ6uVpOX1cJSUROCRZSkVRKqoMLTOUFghxwzlWRiCDkWSKTrgUBc8mghiWKWlYBAuRcUKNVIqOwO0hd-u6z108Om-sL3Vdy1Z3O58zznDKhYjg-ACWrvPeaZNvXXze7XOM8h-d-a_O_E9nXLg5Ju-KRqt__OiPfgP2ZHCW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>67615788</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Minimally invasive vein harvesting with the SaphLITE retractor system: is it really better?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Feyrer, Richard ; Seitz, Timo ; Strecker, Thomas ; Purbojo, Ariawan ; Fischlein, Theodor ; Weyand, Michael ; Harig, Frank</creator><creatorcontrib>Feyrer, Richard ; Seitz, Timo ; Strecker, Thomas ; Purbojo, Ariawan ; Fischlein, Theodor ; Weyand, Michael ; Harig, Frank</creatorcontrib><description>The value of newly developed techniques for saphenous vein harvesting remains controversial. Which technique offers the most benefits is still unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the conventional vein harvesting through a continuous skin incision method with 2 less invasive methods and evaluate surgical advantages and postoperative results.
In this prospective study, 110 patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized into 3 groups: vein harvesting by standard continuous skin incisions (group I), conventional bridge technique (group II), and the SaphLITE retractor system (group III). Particular interest was paid to collecting intraoperative data and postoperative clinical results.
The ratio of vein length to incision length was 0.89 for group I, 1.9 for group II, and 3.3 for group III. Dissection time per centimeter of vein harvested and time for wound closure were found to be 1.23 min and 0.77 min for group I, 0.89 min and 0.57 min for group II, and 0.96 min and 0.46 min for group III. No wound infection was seen in either group; conduit quality, postoperative pain, and mobilization were similar. Hematoma and edema formation were less frequent in groups I and II. The best cosmetic results were seen in the SaphLITE group.
Less invasive vein harvesting techniques, especially with use of the SaphLITE retractor system, yield favorable clinical results, particular with respect to cosmetic appearance. Compared to the conventional approach, the SaphLITE method is suitable for routine vein harvesting because it has fewer complications and is easy and fast to perform. Because the bridge technique does not require special instruments, it has economic advantages.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1098-3511</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1522-6662</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1532/HSF98.20051032</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16401537</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States</publisher><subject>Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Coronary Artery Bypass ; Female ; Humans ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation ; Prospective Studies ; Saphenous Vein - transplantation ; Tissue and Organ Harvesting - instrumentation</subject><ispartof>The Heart surgery forum, 2006-01, Vol.9 (1), p.E511-E514</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-9538bcd3df3c905b007f771df80f10a6d347a8b79482f69daf63c9b89723fadd3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16401537$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Feyrer, Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seitz, Timo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strecker, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Purbojo, Ariawan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischlein, Theodor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weyand, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harig, Frank</creatorcontrib><title>Minimally invasive vein harvesting with the SaphLITE retractor system: is it really better?</title><title>The Heart surgery forum</title><addtitle>Heart Surg Forum</addtitle><description>The value of newly developed techniques for saphenous vein harvesting remains controversial. Which technique offers the most benefits is still unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the conventional vein harvesting through a continuous skin incision method with 2 less invasive methods and evaluate surgical advantages and postoperative results.
In this prospective study, 110 patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized into 3 groups: vein harvesting by standard continuous skin incisions (group I), conventional bridge technique (group II), and the SaphLITE retractor system (group III). Particular interest was paid to collecting intraoperative data and postoperative clinical results.
The ratio of vein length to incision length was 0.89 for group I, 1.9 for group II, and 3.3 for group III. Dissection time per centimeter of vein harvested and time for wound closure were found to be 1.23 min and 0.77 min for group I, 0.89 min and 0.57 min for group II, and 0.96 min and 0.46 min for group III. No wound infection was seen in either group; conduit quality, postoperative pain, and mobilization were similar. Hematoma and edema formation were less frequent in groups I and II. The best cosmetic results were seen in the SaphLITE group.
Less invasive vein harvesting techniques, especially with use of the SaphLITE retractor system, yield favorable clinical results, particular with respect to cosmetic appearance. Compared to the conventional approach, the SaphLITE method is suitable for routine vein harvesting because it has fewer complications and is easy and fast to perform. Because the bridge technique does not require special instruments, it has economic advantages.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Bypass</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Saphenous Vein - transplantation</subject><subject>Tissue and Organ Harvesting - instrumentation</subject><issn>1098-3511</issn><issn>1522-6662</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkD1PwzAQhi0EoqWwMiJPbCn-aGyHBaGqpZWKGFomhsiJbWKUj2K7Qf33GFrEdKfTc6_uHgCuMRrjlJK7xXqeiTFBKMWIkhMwxCkhCWOMnMYeZSKhKcYDcOH9B0KEEcLOwQCzCYrrfAjenm1rG1nXe2jbXnrba9hr28JKul77YNt3-GVDBUOl4Vpuq9VyM4NOByfL0Dno9z7o5h5aD22I89-kQoeg3cMlODOy9vrqWEfgdT7bTBfJ6uVpOX1cJSUROCRZSkVRKqoMLTOUFghxwzlWRiCDkWSKTrgUBc8mghiWKWlYBAuRcUKNVIqOwO0hd-u6z108Om-sL3Vdy1Z3O58zznDKhYjg-ACWrvPeaZNvXXze7XOM8h-d-a_O_E9nXLg5Ju-KRqt__OiPfgP2ZHCW</recordid><startdate>20060101</startdate><enddate>20060101</enddate><creator>Feyrer, Richard</creator><creator>Seitz, Timo</creator><creator>Strecker, Thomas</creator><creator>Purbojo, Ariawan</creator><creator>Fischlein, Theodor</creator><creator>Weyand, Michael</creator><creator>Harig, Frank</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060101</creationdate><title>Minimally invasive vein harvesting with the SaphLITE retractor system: is it really better?</title><author>Feyrer, Richard ; Seitz, Timo ; Strecker, Thomas ; Purbojo, Ariawan ; Fischlein, Theodor ; Weyand, Michael ; Harig, Frank</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c281t-9538bcd3df3c905b007f771df80f10a6d347a8b79482f69daf63c9b89723fadd3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Bypass</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Saphenous Vein - transplantation</topic><topic>Tissue and Organ Harvesting - instrumentation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Feyrer, Richard</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Seitz, Timo</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Strecker, Thomas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Purbojo, Ariawan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fischlein, Theodor</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Weyand, Michael</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harig, Frank</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Heart surgery forum</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Feyrer, Richard</au><au>Seitz, Timo</au><au>Strecker, Thomas</au><au>Purbojo, Ariawan</au><au>Fischlein, Theodor</au><au>Weyand, Michael</au><au>Harig, Frank</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Minimally invasive vein harvesting with the SaphLITE retractor system: is it really better?</atitle><jtitle>The Heart surgery forum</jtitle><addtitle>Heart Surg Forum</addtitle><date>2006-01-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>E511</spage><epage>E514</epage><pages>E511-E514</pages><issn>1098-3511</issn><eissn>1522-6662</eissn><abstract>The value of newly developed techniques for saphenous vein harvesting remains controversial. Which technique offers the most benefits is still unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the conventional vein harvesting through a continuous skin incision method with 2 less invasive methods and evaluate surgical advantages and postoperative results.
In this prospective study, 110 patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass grafting were randomized into 3 groups: vein harvesting by standard continuous skin incisions (group I), conventional bridge technique (group II), and the SaphLITE retractor system (group III). Particular interest was paid to collecting intraoperative data and postoperative clinical results.
The ratio of vein length to incision length was 0.89 for group I, 1.9 for group II, and 3.3 for group III. Dissection time per centimeter of vein harvested and time for wound closure were found to be 1.23 min and 0.77 min for group I, 0.89 min and 0.57 min for group II, and 0.96 min and 0.46 min for group III. No wound infection was seen in either group; conduit quality, postoperative pain, and mobilization were similar. Hematoma and edema formation were less frequent in groups I and II. The best cosmetic results were seen in the SaphLITE group.
Less invasive vein harvesting techniques, especially with use of the SaphLITE retractor system, yield favorable clinical results, particular with respect to cosmetic appearance. Compared to the conventional approach, the SaphLITE method is suitable for routine vein harvesting because it has fewer complications and is easy and fast to perform. Because the bridge technique does not require special instruments, it has economic advantages.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pmid>16401537</pmid><doi>10.1532/HSF98.20051032</doi></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1098-3511 |
ispartof | The Heart surgery forum, 2006-01, Vol.9 (1), p.E511-E514 |
issn | 1098-3511 1522-6662 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_67615788 |
source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals |
subjects | Aged Aged, 80 and over Coronary Artery Bypass Female Humans Male Middle Aged Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures - instrumentation Prospective Studies Saphenous Vein - transplantation Tissue and Organ Harvesting - instrumentation |
title | Minimally invasive vein harvesting with the SaphLITE retractor system: is it really better? |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-22T01%3A45%3A49IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Minimally%20invasive%20vein%20harvesting%20with%20the%20SaphLITE%20retractor%20system:%20is%20it%20really%20better?&rft.jtitle=The%20Heart%20surgery%20forum&rft.au=Feyrer,%20Richard&rft.date=2006-01-01&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=E511&rft.epage=E514&rft.pages=E511-E514&rft.issn=1098-3511&rft.eissn=1522-6662&rft_id=info:doi/10.1532/HSF98.20051032&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E67615788%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=67615788&rft_id=info:pmid/16401537&rfr_iscdi=true |