Distal versus Ultradistal Bypass Grafts: Amputation-free Survival and Patency Rates in Patients with Critical Leg Ischaemia

ObjectivesCompare the outcome of distal (bypass to the crural arteries) versus ultradistal (bypass to the pedal arteries) bypasses in patients with critical leg ischaemia (CLI).DesignRetrospective analysis of prospectively collected data of patients with CLI undergoing infra-popliteal bypass surgery is performed.Materials and MethodsPatients undergoing infra-popliteal bypass at a single institution between 2004 and 2010 are included. Patency rates at 1-year and amputation-free survival at 12 and 48 months are analysed.ResultsTwo hundred and thirty bypasses were performed in 209 consecutive patients (156 men, median age; 76 years, range; 19–96 years). One hundred and seventy nine (78%) bypass were classified as distal and 51 (22%) as ultradistal. The incidence of diabetes mellitus was significantly higher in the ultradistal group (p = 0.0025). At 1-year, the distal group primary, assisted-primary and secondary patency rates were 61.7%, 83.1% and 87.4% compared to 61.9%, 87.4% and 87.4% in the ultradistal group respectively. Amputation-free survival at 12 and 48 months was 82.9% and 61.5% in the distal group compared to 83.0% and 64.9% in the ultradistal group.ConclusionsThis study show that both distal and ultradistal bypass have comparable outcome regardless of the co-morbidities. The authors believe that elderly patients should be offered ultradistal bypass if indicated to avoid major amputation.