Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 12, 2025

Fully Endoscopic Mitral Valve Repair with Percutaneous Cannulation of Groin Vessels
Published on: May 26, 2023
Prosthetic Conduit Use Does Not Adversely Impact Outcomes after Open Repair of Popliteal Artery Aneurysms
Young Kim1, Roberto S Loanzon1, Kevin W Southerland1
1Division of Vascular and Endovascular Surgery, Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC.
Insights
Prosthetic bypass is a viable alternative to greater saphenous vein (GSV) bypass for popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA) repair. Conduit type did not significantly impact major adverse limb events (MALE) in this study.
Area of Science:
- Vascular Surgery
- Surgical Outcomes
- Arterial Reconstruction
Background:
- Greater saphenous vein (GSV) is optimal for peripheral artery disease (PAD) bypass.
- Pathophysiology of popliteal artery aneurysms (PAA) differs from PAD.
- Conduit type impact on PAA open repair outcomes is unclear.
Purpose of the Study:
- Compare long-term outcomes of GSV versus prosthetic bypass for PAA.
- Identify factors associated with major adverse limb events (MALE) after PAA repair.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective review of 101 patients with PAA undergoing open repair across five hospitals.
- Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazards model used.
- MALE defined as major amputation or reintervention for graft patency.
Main Results:
- No significant difference in MALE rates between GSV and prosthetic bypass groups (19.2% at 2 years).
- Emergent bypass was associated with increased MALE (HR 5.73).
- Prosthetic conduit and postoperative anticoagulation were not associated with MALE.
Conclusions:
- Open PAA repair yields excellent long-term outcomes.
- Prosthetic bypass is a suitable alternative to autogenous conduit for below-knee popliteal bypass.
- GSV availability should not preclude PAA surgical repair.
Background:
Single segment, greater saphenous vein (GSV) conduit is considered the optimal bypass conduit among patients undergoing bypass surgery for peripheral artery disease (PAD). While this data has been extrapolated to patients undergoing bypass for popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs), the pathophysiology of PAA is inherently different when compared to PAD, and the impact of conduit type on long-term outcomes after open repair of PAA remains unclear.
Methods:
A multicenter database of five regional hospitals was retrospectively reviewed for all patients with PAA undergoing open surgical repair. Data were collected on demographic information, operative details, medications, and postoperative outcomes. Kaplan-Meier curves were used to compare freedom from major adverse limb events (MALE) following GSV versus prosthetic bypass. Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify patient-level characteristics associated with MALE, which was defined as major ipsilateral limb amputation or reintervention for graft patency.
Results:
From 1999 to 2020, a total of 101 patients with PAA underwent open exclusion and bypass surgery. Median follow-up period was 4.2 years (interquartile range, 1.3-7.4 years), and complete data were available for 99 (98.0%) patients. The majority of patients were male (99.0%) and Caucasian (93.9%). Only 11.1% of procedures were emergent, with the remainder (88.9%) being elective. All patients underwent medial exposure with a below-knee popliteal bypass target (100%). Bypass conduits included GSV (69.7%), prosthetic conduit (28.3%), and 2 (2.0%) alternative conduits (one spliced arm vein, one cryopreserved vein). Patients undergoing prosthetic bypass were older (72 vs. 66 years, P = 0.001) and had similar rates of medical comorbidities. Compared with the GSV group, patients with prosthetic conduits were more frequently placed on postoperative anticoagulation (60.7% vs. 23.2%, P < 0.001). Conduit type did not impact postoperative complication rates (P = NS each). MALE rates were low overall (19.2% at 2 years), and similar when stratified by conduit type (log rank P = 0.47). On multivariable analysis, emergent bypass was associated with MALE (hazard ratio [HR] 5.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.07-15.85, P < 0.001). Prosthetic conduit usage (HR 1.00, 95% CI, 0.40-2.51, P = 0.99) and postoperative anticoagulation (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.42-2.50, P = 0.97) were not associated with MALE.
Conclusions:
Open repair of PAA is associated with excellent long-term outcomes. Prosthetic bypass is a comparable alternative to autogenous conduit for below-knee popliteal bypass targets, and lack of suitable GSV should not prohibit open surgical repair when indicated.
Related Concept Videos
Peripheral Artery Disease V: Postoperative Nursing Management
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care
Aneurysm IV: Nursing Management
Peripheral Artery Disease III: Interprofessional Care

