Great saphenous vein versus expanded polytetrafluoroethylene graft in patients undergoing elective treatment of popliteal artery aneurysm with posterior approach

Background: Aim of this study is to compare 30-day and 5-year outcomes of great saphenous vein (GSV) vs. expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) graft in patients undergoing elective treatment of popliteal artery aneurysm (PAA) using a posterior approach. Methods: Between January 2010 and December 2023, a retrospectively maintained dataset of all consecutive asymptomatic PAAs who underwent open repair with posterior approach or endovascular repair in 40 centers was investigated. Out of of 971 cases, 525 patients were included in the present analysis. These were further divided into: posterior approach with GSV graft (252, GSV Group), and posterior approach with ePTFE graft (273, ePTFE Group). Thirty-day outcomes were assessed and compared. During follow-up, survival, primary patency, secondary patency, freedom from reintervention(s), and amputation-free survival were compared between the two groups using log-rank tests. Uni- and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed in ePTFE Group to find predictive factors of poor outcomes. Results: Two groups were homogeneous in terms of preoperative risk factors and morphological data. Median follow-up duration was similar [24 months (IQR 10 - 36) GSV Group vs. 21 months (IQR 7-47) ePTFE Group; p = .123]. At 5 years, there were no differences between the two groups in terms of survival (84.7% GSV Group vs. 86.1% ePTFE Group; p = .097, log-rank = 2.756), secondary patency (94.9% GSV Group vs. 89.4% ePTFE Group; p = .068, log-rank = 3.336), and amputation-free survival (99.1% GSV Group vs. 99.6% ePTFE Group; p = .567, log-rank = .328). Five-year primary patency (89.5% GSV Group vs. 76.2% ePTFE Group; p = .007, log-rank = 7.239), and freedom from reintervention(s) (92.8% GSV Group vs. 80.6% ePTFE Group; p = .011, log-rank = 6.449) were significantly higher in GSV Group. Using multivariate analysis in ePTFE Group, factors compromising primary patency were patients on dialysis (p = .054, OR = 3.641), and patients that were not on any preoperative antiplatelet therapy or anticoagulation (p = .019, OR = 5.532), whilst none of the perioperative factors affected freedom from reintervention(s). Conclusion: GSV as graft guaranteed better primary patency with less reinterventions rates at mid-term follow-up after treatment of PAAs via a posterior approach. Patients on dialysis and who were not on any preoperative antiplatelet therapy or anticoagulation had lower patency rates.