Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 3, 2026

Complete and Partial Resuscitative Endovascular Balloon Occlusion of the Aorta for Hemorrhagic Shock
Published on: May 19, 2022
Endovascular correction in acute bleeding after femoro-popliteal bypass: a single-center experience
Giulia Mazzitelli1, Mariagnese Mele1, Francesco Setacci1
1Vascular and Endovascular Surgery Unit, Department of Medicine, Surgery and Neurological Sciences, University of Siena, Siena, Italy.
Insights
Endovascular correction (EC) offers a promising alternative to surgical revision (SR) for bleeding complications following peripheral bypass (PB). While EC shows high success rates, further randomized trials are needed to establish it as the gold standard.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Endovascular Interventions
- Graft Complications
Background:
- Bleeding complications after peripheral bypass (PB) can necessitate further intervention.
- Endovascular correction (EC) is emerging as a potential alternative to surgical revision (SR).
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the efficacy and safety of EC compared to SR for managing bleeding complications in PB.
- To compare outcomes of EC and SR in patients experiencing acute bleeding post-PB.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 32 patients with acute bleeding post-PB between 2004-2014.
- Interventions included EC (n=11 initially, 15 total) and SR (n=21).
- Outcomes assessed: technical success, reintervention rates, 12-month patency, limb salvage, and survival rates.
Main Results:
- EC achieved 100% technical success with no reinterventions needed.
- SR group experienced early re-bleeding in 19.1% of cases, managed successfully with EC.
- 12-month outcomes favored EC: 80% patency, 93.3% limb salvage, 100% survival vs. 71.4%, 88.2%, 88.2% for SR.
Conclusions:
- Endovascular correction presents an attractive alternative for managing peripheral bypass bleeding.
- Current data suggests EC is effective and safe, but more evidence is required.
- Randomized clinical trials are essential to compare EC and SR and define the gold standard treatment.
Background:
The endovascular correction (EC) has emerged in recent years as a possible alternative to surgical revision (SR) in case of bleeding complications after peripheral bypass (PB). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of EC compared to SR in case of bleeding complications of PB.
Methods:
From January 2004 to December 2014, we have submitted 32 patients to surgery for acute bleeding in previous PB (25 venous bypass, in situ or reversed, 6 PTFE bypass and 1 composite bypass). The cause of the bleeding was the dehiscence of proximal anastomosis in 14 patients, the dehiscence of distal anastomosis in 11 patients and the rupture of the graft in 7 patients. All patients postoperatively underwent anticoagulation or antiplatelet therapy, antibiotic therapy and close ultrasound follow-up. Patency rate, limb salvage rate and survival rate in the short term were assessed by Kaplan-Meier curves.
Results:
Of the 32 patients treated for acute bleeding in previous PB, 11 underwent endovascular correction with a technical success of 100% (no need for reintervention), while in 21 patients a surgical revision was performed. Among the latter, in 4 cases (19.1%) an early bleeding occurred, and endovascular correction was promptly performed solving the bleeding in the absence of sequelae (then a total of 15 patients were treated by endovascular correction). The 12-month patency, limb salvage and survival rates were respectively 71.4%, 88.2% and 88.2% in the SR group and 80%, 93.3% and 100% in the EC.
Conclusions:
This topic underlines that endovascular correction after peripheral bypass bleeding is an attractive alternative to surgery, but there are still a few data to change the gold standard treatment. Randomized clinical trials comparing the two treatment options are warranted.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Venous Thrombosis III: Interprofessional Care
Peripheral Artery Disease V: Postoperative Nursing Management
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care

