RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: There is a risk of distal embolization lower extremity endovascular interventions. Possibly a drug-coating embolism caused by coating detachment from intravascular devices. METHODS: This review focuses on providing updated information on distal embolism in endovascular revascularization of lower extremity arteries, including the use of drug-coated balloons. RESULTS: Drug-coating embolism is a special case of distal embolization during recanalization of the arteries of the lower extremities. Preclinical studies have demonstrated embolization of drug-coated balloons during angioplasty of lower extremity arteries. However, the clinical role of drug-coating embolism is not completely clear. A 2020 meta-analysis found an increased risk of major lower extremity amputation after drug-coated balloon angioplasty in patients with critical limb ischemia. But long-term research is emerging to support the safety of using these devices. Perhaps a more thorough assessment of the quality of life and the degree of compensation of lower limb ischemia with an intraoperative assessment of the frequency of peripheral embolizations using ultrasound emboli detection, as well as microcirculation with transcutaneous oximetry and laser Doppler flowmetry of the operated lower limb will allow a more detailed study of the phenomenon of drug-coating embolism and its impact on long-term clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: According to the results of preclinical studies, the use of paclitaxel-coated balloons leads to an increase in the concentration of paclitaxel in distal skeletal muscles. However, paclitaxel concentration in skeletal muscle was significantly higher in first-generation DCBs. The non-target effects of drug-coating balloon are not fully understood and require further study. Understanding the phenomenon of drug-coating embolism can help physicians to better assess the patient risk and to minimize complications.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Careful selection of patients for carotid stenting is necessary. We suggest that patients with a shaggy aorta syndrome may be at higher risk for perioperative embolic complications. METHODS: The study is a retrospective subanalysis of the SIBERIA Trial. We included 72 patients undergoing transfemoral carotid artery stenting. Patients were monitored during the procedures using multifrequency transcranial Doppler with embolus detection and differentiation. Pre- and postprocedural (2 and 30 days) cerebral diffusion-weighted cerebral MRIs were performed. RESULTS: Forty-six patients had shaggy aorta syndrome. Intraoperative embolisms were recorded in 82.6% and 46.1% of patients with and without shaggy aorta syndrome, respectively (P=0.001). New asymptomatic ischemic brain lesions in the postoperative period occurred in 78.3% and in 26.9% of patients with and without shaggy aorta syndrome, respectively (P<0.001). There were no cases of stroke within 2 days in both groups. 3 (6.5%) cases of stroke within 30 days after the procedure were observed only in patients with shaggy aorta syndrome. There were no cases of contralateral stroke. Shaggy aorta syndrome (OR 5.54 [1.83:16.7], P=0.001) and aortic arch ulceration (OR 6.67 [1.19: 37.3], P=0.02) were independently associated with cerebral embolism. Shaggy aorta syndrome (OR 9.77 [3.14-30.37], P<0.001) and aortic arch ulceration (OR 12.9 [2.3: 72.8], P=0.003) were independently associated with ipsilateral new asymptomatic ischemic brain lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Shaggy aorta syndrome and aortic arch ulceration significantly increase the odds of intraoperative embolism and new asymptomatic ischemic brain lesions. Carotid endarterectomy or transcervical carotid stent should be selected in patients with shaggy aorta syndrome.
