Three-Year Patency Results following Endovascular Transvenous Femoropopliteal Bypass
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background and Objectives: Peripheral artery disease is one of the most common vascular pathologies. There is an ongoing debate among specialists on whether open or endovascular revascularization is preferred in cases of complex superficial femoral artery (SFA) lesions. The purpose of this study was to assess patency results of a relatively new transvenous endovascular bypass device. This could add to existing evidence and aid in comparison between open and endovascular bypass. Materials and Methods: Patients with complex TASC-C and D SFA lesions who had indications for revascularization were identified. Prospective analysis of stent graft patency from 54 transvenous femoropopliteal bypass procedures was performed. Patency was assessed by Duplex ultrasound every six months. Kaplan–Meier analysis was performed to assess primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency of transvenous bypass. Results: Following endovascular transvenous femoropopliteal bypass, 3-year graft primary, primary-assisted, and secondary patency was 43.8%, 66.3%, and 73.9%, respectively. Conclusions: Transvenous endovascular femoropopliteal bypass is a viable option for selected patients who lack adequate saphenous vein or have comorbidities that increase the risk of open femoropopliteal bypass. Strict post-operative follow-up is necessary to improve patency rates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".