Abstract
Background: The introduction of endoscopic saphenous vein graft harvesting has been known for two decades. It offers benefits related to decreased rate of donner site complications. Debates related to its safety in terms of trauma to the wall of the venous graft and long-term graft patency have been raised, but few studies had investigated this point. Our aim is to compare the endoscopic saphenous vein harvest and conventional harvest techniques, in terms of the integrity of the wall of the vein graft.
Methods: A prospective study in which we examined 80 samples of saphenous vein from 80 patients to whom coronary artery bypass grafting was done. Patients randomly were assigned to either technique. Vein samples were taken from patients having the conventional technique (group 1, 40 patients) and from patients having endoscopic vein harvest (group 2, 40 patients). Vein samples were stained with Hematoxylin & Eosin, Masson's trichrome, and immuno-histochemical stain for CD 31 and then examined by light microscopy. The degree of intimal staining was graded from 0% to 100%, which is directly related to the degree of intimal preservation (the least injury, the more the staining score) and vein media changes were reported.
Results: Patient characteristics were comparable in the groups. Group 1 (conventional group) was better than group 2 (endoscopic group), regarding endothelial integrity and medial changes although it was statistically not significant.
Conclusion: Both the conventional and endoscopic techniques are comparable, regarding the intimal preservation of the venous graft.