Femorofemoral Bypass as an Alternative to a Direct Aortic Approach in Daily Practice: Appraisal of its Current Indications and Midterm Results

BackgroundTo assess our current practice concerning the indications and the immediate and midterm results of femorofemoral bypass.MethodsWe retrospectively included all patients, from 1997 to 2008, operated on for aortoiliac occlusive disease using an extra-anatomical bypass from a donor iliac artery or a femoral artery to the contralateral femoral artery (common or profunda artery). Demographic data, initial clinical status, characteristics of the interventions, and short- and midterm results were collected. Elective surgery was distinguished from urgent surgery (critical limb ischemia, acute ischemia, vascular infection).ResultsOne hundred twenty-four femorofemoral bypasses were performed (103 male), mean age 68 (±12) years. Indications were critical limb ischemia (47.1%), intermittent claudication (38.8%), acute ischemia (12.1%), and vascular infections (1.7%). Perioperative outcomes were 5.6% mortality (elective surgery 0.0%, urgent surgery 9.7%, P = 0.02) and 27.4% morbidity without any secondary graft infections (elective surgery 22.5%, urgent surgery 31.9%, P = 0.17). Mean follow-up period was 3 years, and overall survival was 69.4% (elective surgery 88.7%, urgent surgery 56.7%, P = 0.08). At 3 years, primary patency was 81.8% and secondary patency was 89.3% (elective surgery 96.4%, urgent surgery 84.2%, P = 0.68). No significant risk factors for immediate and secondary thromboses were found.ConclusionIn our current practice, femorofemoral bypasses are applied mainly for urgent procedures when avoiding a direct aortic approach is mandatory, with good midterm results. Although indications are limited for good-fit patients, femorofemoral bypass has confirmed safety (no perioperative deaths, no infections) and high durability (good secondary patency).