Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 10, 2026
Surgical Swine Model of Chronic Cardiac Ischemia Treated by Off-Pump Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery
Published on: March 27, 2018
Long-term results of a multicenter randomized study on direct versus crossover bypass for unilateral iliac artery
Jean-Baptiste Ricco1, Hervé Probst,
1Vascular Surgery Service, University Hospital of Poitiers, Poitiers, France. j.b.ricco@chu-poitiers.fr
Insights
Direct bypass surgery offers superior long-term patency compared to crossover bypass for patients with unilateral iliac artery occlusive disease. Crossover bypass is best reserved for high-risk individuals when angioplasty is not an option.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Interventional Cardiology
- Peripheral Artery Disease
Background:
- Unilateral iliac artery occlusive disease often requires surgical intervention when angioplasty is not feasible.
- Direct and crossover bypass are surgical options, but their long-term efficacy in specific patient groups is debated.
- Assessing late patency rates is crucial for determining the optimal surgical strategy.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the late patency rates of direct versus crossover bypass surgery.
- To evaluate outcomes in good-risk patients with unilateral iliac occlusive disease unsuitable for angioplasty.
- To identify patient subgroups that may benefit more from one surgical approach over the other.
Main Methods:
- A randomized controlled trial involving 143 patients with unilateral iliac artery occlusive disease.
- Patients were assigned to either direct bypass (n=69) or crossover bypass (n=74).
- Follow-up included yearly duplex scanning and ankle-brachial index measurements, with angiography for abnormalities; median follow-up was 7.4 years.
Main Results:
- Direct bypass demonstrated significantly higher primary patency at 5 years (92.7%) compared to crossover bypass (73.2%, P=.001).
- Assisted primary and secondary patency rates at 5 years were also superior for direct bypass.
- Patency after crossover bypass was better in patients with less severe superficial femoral artery (SFA) disease.
Conclusions:
- Direct bypass surgery leads to better late patency in good-risk patients with unilateral iliac occlusive disease not amenable to angioplasty.
- Crossover bypass should be considered primarily for high-risk patients with unilateral iliac occlusion when percutaneous recanalization is not possible.
Objective:
To compare late patency after direct and crossover bypass in good-risk patients with unilateral iliac occlusive disease not amenable to angioplasty.
Methods:
Between May 1986 and March 1991, 143 patients with unilateral iliac artery occlusive disease and disabling claudication were randomized into two surgical treatment groups, ie, crossover bypass (n = 74) or direct bypass (n = 69). The size of the patient population was calculated to allow detection of a possible 20% difference in patency in favor of direct bypass with a one-sided alpha risk of 0.05 and a beta risk of 0.10. Patients underwent yearly follow-up examinations using color flow duplex scanning with ankle-brachial systolic pressure index measurement. Digital angiography was performed if hemodynamic abnormalities were noted. Median follow-up was 7.4 years. Primary endpoints were primary patency and assisted primary patency estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method with 95% confidence interval. Secondary endpoints were secondary patency and postoperative mortality and morbidity.
Results:
Cardiovascular risk factors, preoperative symptoms, iliac lesions TASC class (C in 87 [61%] patients and D in 56 [39%] patients), and superficial femoral artery (SFA) run-off were comparable in the two treatment groups. One patient in the direct bypass group died postoperatively. Primary patency at 5 years was higher in the direct bypass group than in the crossover bypass group (92.7 +/- 6.1% vs 73.2 +/- 10%, P = .001). Assisted primary patency and secondary patency at 5 years were also higher after direct bypass than crossover bypass (92.7 +/- 6.1% vs 84.3 +/- 8.5%, P = .04 and 97.0 +/- 3.0% vs 89.8 +/- 7.1%, P = .03, respectively). Patency at 5 years after crossover bypass was significantly higher in patients presenting no or low-grade SFA stenosis than in patients presenting high-grade (> or =50%) stenosis or occlusion of the SFA (74.0 +/- 12% vs 62.5 +/- 19%, P = .04). In both treatment groups, patency was comparable using polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) and polyester grafts. Overall survival was 59.5 +/- 12% at 10 years.
Conclusion:
This study showed that late patency was higher after direct bypass than crossover bypass in good-risk patients with unilateral iliac occlusive disease not amenable to angioplasty. Crossover bypass should be reserved for high-risk patients with unilateral iliac occlusion not amenable to percutaneous recanalization.