Saphenous vein graft disease
Summary
Patients undergoing saphenous vein graft (SVG) intervention usually present with degenerated SVGs, are often older, and suffer significant comorbidities. SVG intervention carries a higher risk of distal embolization and poorer outcome than native coronary vessel intervention, despite advances in embolic protection and pharmacotherapy. Although, embolic protection devices have demonstrated to decrease the risk of embolization after SVG intervention, their value in contemporary practice have been questioned. However, in many cases those devices are not utilised or cannot be used. This article describes the natural history of disease involving SVGs, discusses the risk-benefit of SVG interventions, reviews prevention strategies for no-reflow, and offers a perspective on the utility of percutaneous SVG intervention in both elective and acute settings.
Introduction
The utility of aorto-coronary saphenous vein grafts (SVGs) is limited by gradual attrition, regardless of the territory bypassed: approximately 10% of SVGs occlude before hospital discharge or within 30 days, 65% to 80% are patent at 5 years, and 50% to 60% are patent at 10 years 1, 2, 3
Sign up for free!
Join us for free and access thousands of articles from EuroIntervention, as well as presentations, videos, cases from PCRonline.com
- Motwani JG, Topol EJ. Aortocoronary saphenous vein graft disease: pathogenesis, predisposition, and prevention. Circulation. 1998;97:916-31.
- Coolong A, Baim DS, Kuntz RE, O’Malley AJ, Marulkar S, Cutlip DE, Popma JJ, Mauri L. Saphenous vein graft stenting and major adverse cardiac events: a predictive model derived from a pooled analysis of 3958 patients. Circulation. 2008;117:790-7.
- Keeley EC, Velez CA, O’Neill WW, Safian RD. Long-term clinical outcome and predictors of major adverse cardiac events after percutaneous interventions on saphenous vein grafts. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;38:659-65.
- Gruberg L, Hong MK, Mehran R, et al. In-hospital and long-term results of stent deployment compared with balloon angioplasty for treatment of narrowing at the saphenous vein graft distal anastomosis site. Am J Cardiol. 1999;84:1381-4.
- Gruberg L, Dangas G, Mehran R, Hong MK, Waksman R, Mintz GS, Kent KM, Pichard AD, Satler LF, Lansky AJ, Stone GW, Leon MB. Percutaneous revascularization of the internal mammary artery graft: short- and long-term outcomes. J Am Coll Cardiol 2000;35:944-8.
- Vermeersch P, Agostoni P, Verheye S, Van den Heuvel P, Convens C, Bruining N, Van den Branden F, Van Langenhove G. Randomized double-blind comparison of sirolimus-eluting stent versus bare-metal stent implantation in diseased saphenous vein grafts: six-month angiographic, intravascular ultrasound, and clinical follow-up of the RRISC Trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;48:2423-31.
- Brilakis ES, Lichtenwalter C, de Lemos JA, Roesle M, Obel O, Haagen D, Saeed B, Gadiparthi C, Bissett JK, Sachdeva R, Voudris VV, Karyofillis P, Kar B, Rossen J, Fasseas P, Berger P, Banerjee S. A randomized controlled trial of a paclitaxel-eluting stent versus a similar bare-metal stent in saphenous vein graft lesions the SOS (Stenting of Saphenous Vein Grafts) trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53:919-28.
- Hong YJ, Pichard DA, Mintz GS, et al. Outcome of Undersized Drug-Eluting Stents for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Saphenous Vein Graft Lesions. Am J Cardiol. 2010;105:179-185.
- Baim DS, Wahr D, George B, Leon MB, Greenberg J, Cutlip DE, Kaya U, Popma JJ, Ho KK, Kuntz RE. Saphenous vein graft Angioplasty Free of Emboli Randomized (SAFER) Trial Investigators; Randomized trial of a distal embolic protection device during percutaneous intervention of saphenous vein aorto-coronary bypass grafts. Circulation. 2002;105:1285-90.
- Mauri L, Cox D, Hermiller J, Massaro J, Wahr J, Tay SW, Jonas M, Popma JJ, Pavliska J, Wahr D, Rogers C. The PROXIMAL trial: proximal protection during saphenous vein graft intervention using the Proxis Embolic Protection System: a randomized, prospective, multicenter clinical trial. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007;50:1442-9.