A randomized trial of endoscopic versus open saphenous vein harvest in coronary bypass surgery

The purpose of this study was to determine whether or not endoscopic vein harvest is a reliable, beneficial, and cost-effective method for saphenous vein harvest in coronary bypass surgery (CABG).

A total of 100 patients having primary CABG were prospectively randomized to either endoscopic (EVH; n = 47) or open saphenous vein harvest (OVH; n = 50). Three patients in the EVH group required both techniques and were excluded from analysis.

The groups did not differ in preoperative characteristics, including: age, gender, left ventricular function, height, weight, percent over ideal body weight, incidence of diabetes, peripheral vascular disease, or preoperative laboratory values (creatinine, albumin, or hematocrit). The EVH group had longer vein harvest and preparation times than the OVH group, while the incision length was significantly shorter. There was no difference between groups in mortality, perioperative myocardial infarction, intensive care unit or postoperative length of stay, blood product utilization, or discharge laboratory measures. There was more drainage noted from leg incisions at hospital discharge in the OVH (34%) versus EVH group (8%; p = 0.001), but more ecchymosis in the EVH group. Although there was a trend towards reduced leg incision pain in the EVH group, there was no statistically significant difference in pain or in the quality of life measure at any point in time. There was no difference between groups in readmission to hospital, administration of antibiotics, or incidence of leg infection. While mean hospital charges for the EVH group were approximately $1,500 greater than for OVH, this difference did not reach statistical significance.

EVH is a safe, reliable, and cost-neutral method for saphenous vein harvest. The best indication for EVH may be in patients who are at increased risk for wound infection and in those for whom cosmesis is a major concern.