Availability of the Great Saphenous Veins as Conduits for Arterial Bypass Surgery in Patients with Varicose Veins

<b>Background:</b> The great saphenous vein (GSV) has long been recognized as the best conduit for vascular bypass procedures. Concomitant varicose veins disease may be a reason for GSV unavailability either due to dilatation and tortuosity of the vein or due to its destruction during invasive venous treatment. <b>Objectives</b>-to assess the rate of varicose vein patients with concomitant lower extremity arterial disease (LEAD) who have previously lost their GSV due to venous ablation. <b>Material and Methods:</b> A total of 285 patients (76 F, 209 M) with LEAD were consecutively enrolled. A total of 111 patients (222 limbs) underwent a detailed duplex ultrasound of the lower extremity veins for assessing suitability of the GSV as a conduit. We registered presence of varicose veins (VVs), type of previous invasive procedure and availability of saphenous veins as possible grafts. <b>Results:</b> The mean age of screened patients was 70.5 ± 9.1.62 (21.75%) patients had varicose veins or were operated on before due to varicose veins. A total of 42 patients with varicose veins had C2 disease, 10 had C3, 9 had C4 and 1 had C6 according to CEAP classification. A total of 222 lower extremities were examined by duplex ultrasound of which 51 limbs had VVs. Despite the presence of varicose tributaries, the GSV was suitable for bypass in 9 of those lower extremities. The GSV was not available as a conduit in 34 (19.9%) ipsilateral lower extremities in the LEAD with no VVs group and in 42 (82.6%) ipsilateral lower extremities in the LEAD with VVs group (<i>p</i> = 0.0001). Varicose vein disease was associated with a higher frequency of the GSV unavailability (odds ratio 18.8, 95% confidence interval 8.35-42.35). On the 11 ipsilateral limbs (5% of LEAD patients and 21.6% of LEAD with VVs patients), the GSV was unavailable due to previous venous interventions. <b>Conclusions:</b> Almost 20% of patients may have both LEAD and VVs. Among those with VVs, most have the ipsilateral GSV unavailable as a potential conduit. Additionally, one fifth of limbs with VVs had GSVs destroyed previously due to saphenous ablative procedures.