Search

Background: A short saphenous vein segment is commonly used as a conduit for coronary artery bypass grafting, and clinicians must decide whether to obtain it by performing open (OVH) or endoscopic vein harvest (EVH). We conducted a health economic evaluation, using data on resource usage collected alongside a randomized controlled trial, to investigate whether EVH is cost-effective compared with OVH., Methods: Analyses were performed in accordance with international guidelines for health economic evaluations. We constructed 3 cost-levels as the current literature is inconclusive as to which resource consumptions differ significantly between harvesting methods. Outcomes were measured as purulent infections avoided in the cost-effectiveness analysis and for the cost-utility analysis we estimated quality-adjusted life-years gained. Results were presented as incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: ie, the extra cost of obtaining one extra quality-adjusted life-year and the extra cost of avoiding one purulent infection. To handle uncertainties, we performed bias corrected bootstrap analyses on 5,000 resamples and constructed cost-effectiveness acceptability curves., Results: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was $79,391/quality-adjusted life-year and $1,970/purulent infection avoided when costs and outcomes within 35 days postoperatively were compared. Within 35 days postoperatively, EVH was less than 1% cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/quality-adjusted life-year., Conclusions: The EVH was not cost-effective within 35 days postoperatively. Future studies should investigate long-term cost effectiveness., (Copyright © 2012 The Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Radial artery harvesting has been routinely performed by endoscopy. We present a reduced cost technique using a reusable retractor and thermal welding shears. The combination of reusable and disposable tools allows patients to benefit from endoscopic radial artery harvesting with decreased morbidity and favorable cosmetic results.

Purpose: We describe a minimally invasive, cost effective, and safe method of radial artery harvesting., Description: After obtaining informed consent and completing a preoperative evaluation, 169 radial arteries were harvested. Harvesting was accomplished through a 3-cm proximal mid forearm incision with exposure provided by a modified self-retaining lighted retractor., Evaluation: A total of 169 radial arteries were successfully harvested. The average incision length was 2.9 cm, radial artery length was 15.8 cm, and harvest time was 32.7 minutes. No trauma to the artery or graft spasm was evident. No procedure required conversion to an open technique. Superficial cellulitis occurred in 2 patients (1.2%) and wound infection in 1 (0.6%). Three patients (1.8%) experienced intermittent residual dysesthesia. All of the patients were highly satisfied with the excellent aesthetic results. This approach allowed for a substantial cost savings compared with other minimally invasive techniques., Conclusions: Direct minimally invasive radial artery harvesting is an acceptable alternative approach to radial artery harvesting. This method is safe, cost effective, easily reproducible, and aesthetically pleasing.