Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_3591_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
29.08.2026
Размер:
89 Мб
Скачать
26 Interventions oftheExtremity Arteries
327

26.5 Recent Advances

26.5.1 Advances inAngioplasty Balloons
Cutting balloons are noncompliant balloons provided with 3–4 atherotomes which “score” the plaque and increase tar­get lesion compliance especially in severe calcication and recurrent stenosis. However, their superiority over plain bal­loon angioplasty is yet to be established [30]. Cryotherapy balloons use a temperature of 10 °C caused by nitrous oxide that reduces plaque inammation and proliferation of smooth muscle cells.
26.5.2 Drug-Eluting Technology
Drug-eluting agents inhibit post-intervention inammation and neointimal hyperplasia. The drugs used can be cyto­toxic agents like paclitaxel (M phase inhibitors) or cyto­static agents like sirolimus and its analogs (G1-phase inhibitors). Drug-coated balloons use standard balloon angioplasty and antiproliferative agent. In a meta-analysis of drug-eluting balloons versus plain balloon in peripheral arterial disease, there was advantage of drug-eluting bal­loons in anatomic endpoints like primary patency and target lesion revascularization. However, no advantage was dem­onstrated in terms of clinical endpoints like amputation, mortality or change in ABI [31]. Stent-based drug delivery systems are composed of a metallic platform, drug carrier vehicle, and a therapeutic agent that reduces neointimal growth. Zilver PTX randomized controlled trial evaluated the durability of paclitaxel- coated drug-eluting stents for femoropopliteal arterial lesions [32]. SIROCCO trial dem­onstrated no signicant difference between sirolimus-elut­ing and bare metal stents in femoropopliteal disease, whereas everolimus-eluting stents had favorable outcomes and clinical improvement [33, 34]. Drug-eluting stents have been shown to decrease reintervention risk and amputation in focal disease of infrapopliteal arteries with no effect on mortality as compared to plain balloon angioplasty or bare metal stent implantation [35].
26.5.4 Techniques forChronic Total Occlusion (CTO)
CTOs are characterized by atherosclerotic plaque causing complete occlusion of artery for more than three months. A rigid brous cap is seen at both ends with core consisting of lipid, thrombus, and extracellular matrix. Antegrade, retro­grade, or combined intimal/subintimal approach can be used for traversing a CTO.A variety of crossing devices have been developed that cause microdissection (FRONTRUNNER), mechanical vibration (CROSSER cath­eter), or mechanical rotation (WILDCAT) and aid in intimal crossing. Subintimal angioplasty can circumvent the dis­eased portion of the vessel and provide a plaque-free space. The disadvantage is difcult re-entry into true lumen which can be achieved by various re-entry devices like outback catheter, pioneer catheter, or enteer catheter. Various com­bined approaches of subintimal crossing include CART (controlled antegrade and retrograde subintimal tracking), reverse CART, and SAFARI (subintimal arterial ossing with antegrade-retrograde intervention. Nowadays, classic CART is rarely performed due to risk of delivering the bal­loon across fragile collaterals. Hence, reverse CART is a more safe method.
26.5.5 Advances inDebulking andPlaque Removal
Atherectomy devices obliterate atheromatous plaque and increase luminal diameter without placing a foreign body. Atherectomy can be of four types: directional, rotational, orbital, and laser atherectomy [37]. Intravascular lithotripsy results in plaque modication in lesions with severe calci­cation. In a recent meta-analysis, lithotripsy is a safe and effective method for calcied plaques with diameter reduc­tion up to 59%; however, high-quality evidence is required to prove its efcacy in terms of clinical characteristics and comparison with other modalities [38].
26.5.6 Pedal Arch Revascularization
26.5.3 Bioresorbable Stents
These stents dissolve and disappear from the vessel after a period of 2–4years. This avoids potential complications like in-stent restenosis and long-term antiplatelet therapy. Most of the bioresorbable stents tested in human studies are derived from synthetic polymers such as poly-L-lactic acid (PLLA) [36]. The disadvantages include inferior ten­sile modulus, thicker struts, and increased crossing prole.
The main pedal-plantar connection is the pedal-plantar loop which is formed by the anastomosis between dorsalis pedis artery with plantar arch and lateral plantar artery. Pedal­plantar loop technique consists of recanalization of both pedal and plantar arteries with their anastomosis. In a sys­tematic review and meta-analysis, no statistically signicant difference was observed when tibial and pedal artery inter­ventions were performed as compared to tibial interventions alone. However, wound healing was better when both tibial and pedal artery interventions were combined [39].
328
M. Verma and N. N. Pandey
26.5.7 Percutaneous Deep Vein Arterialization (DVA)
DVA is performed in no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia and occlusion of pedal arteries with the rationale of providing nutritional support by reversal of ow through venules and stimulation of angiogenesis. A nitinol stent is used to create an arteriovenous stula [40].
26.5.8 Therapeutic Angiogenesis andStem Cell Therapy
Cell-based therapies are newer approaches in no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia and therapeutic angio­genesis with bone marrow-derived stem cells (BM-SC) or progenitor cells have been used in various clinical studies. The stem cells are stimulated by the surrounding hypoxic environment, and due to the paracrine effects of various fac­tors, neo-angiogenesis is initiated [41]. A meta-analysis has demonstrated the efcacy of cell-based therapy in terms of ulcer healing, reduced amputation rate, and improvement in pain-free walking distance [42].

26.6 Acute Limb Ischemia

In patients with possible diagnosis of acute limb ischemia, Rutherford classication is recommended for clinical evalu­ation (Table26.1) and computed tomography angiography is the rst-line modality for anatomical imaging [43].
Initial medical management includes analgesia and intra­venous administration of unfractionated heparin—initially 70–100IU/kg followed by infusion and monitoring by acti­vated clotting time or activated partial thromboplastin time (APTT). Threatened limbs require revascularization which can be performed by open surgical or endovascular tech-
niques. Open revascularization techniques include thrombo­embolectomy and surgical bypass. For patients with ALI, intravenous thrombolysis is not recommended. The various endovascular methods for treatment of ALI include catheter­directed thrombolysis (CDT), thrombus aspiration, mechani­cal thrombectomy, and ultrasound accelerated thrombolysis. In patients with Rutherford class IIa, CDT can be considered as an alternative to surgery (IA), whereas in IIb class, CDT may be considered if initiated promptly and can be combined with thromboaspiration or thrombectomy (IIb B) [43]. Patients with Rutherford class I have signicant morbidity and mortality when thrombolysis is performed for condition that does not threaten their limbs. Hence, these patients are treated conservatively with best medical treatment and supervised walking therapy.
Anterior wall puncture is recommended ideally under ultrasound guidance. Urokinase and recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rtPA) are the most commonly used thrombolytic agents. Society of Interventional Radiology recommends weight-based dose to be 0.02–0.1mg/kg/hour [44]. The non-weight related dose is between 0.25 and 1 mg/hour with the maximum recommended dose being 40 mg. For patients undergoing thrombolysis systemic therapeutic, heparinization is not recommended. Patients should be monitored for vital signs, access site complica­tions, and limb condition. Mechanical thrombectomy can be performed using rheolytic catheters or microfragmenta­tion. Ultrasound accelerated thrombolysis can be per­formed using high frequency low intensity ultrasound that hastens enzymatic clot lysis by loosening brin strands and exposing more plasminogen receptors for binding. In a Cochrane review comparing open surgery versus throm­bolysis in ALI, there were no signicant differences in limb survival or mortality after 30days, 6 months, or 1 year. However, after 1month the thrombolysis group had more hemorrhagic strokes, major bleeding, and distal emboliza­tion [45].
Table 26.1 Rutherford classication for acute limb ischemia [6]
Category
I.Viable Audible Audible II.Threatened (a) Marginally Minimal (toes) Inaudible Audible (b) Immediately More than toes Mild to moderate Inaudible Audible III.Irreversible Profound Profound Inaudible Inaudible
Findings
Sensory loss Muscle weakness Arterial Venous
Doppler signals
ab
26 Interventions oftheExtremity Arteries
329

26.7 Popliteal Artery Entrapment Syndrome (PAES)

It is characterized by abnormal compression of popliteal artery due to its abnormal relationship with surrounding myofascial structures. There are six types according to anatomy- based classication: medial course of artery (type
1), lateral insertion of medial head of gastrocnemius muscle
(type 2), accessory muscle slip (type 3), brous band or pop­liteus muscle (type 4), abnormality with entrapment of pop­liteal vein and artery (type 5), and hypertrophy of gastrocnemius muscle (type 6).Repeated trauma to the artery during plantar or dorsal exion results in premature athero­sclerosis and thrombosis or distal thromboembolism [46]. Imaging modalities depict stenosis of popliteal artery during dynamic compression. The denitive treatment for PAES types 1–5 is the surgical release of gastrocnemius muscle / brous band. In acute arterial thrombosis, catheter-mediated thrombolysis can be performed.
Fig. 26.9 A 50-year-old man with moderate osteoarthritis. Digital angiogram revealed signicant synovial blush from descending genicular artery in medial knee joint (a) which was embolized using imipenam/cilastin with reduction in synovial blush (b)

26.8 Genicular Artery Embolization (GAE)

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a degenerative joint disease charac­terized by wear and tear of joint, cartilage, and bone. Mechanical forces result in degenerative changes and inammation which stimulates angiogenesis. Kallgren and Lawrence (KL) classication denotes the grading system based on OA severity. GAE is the selective intra-arterial embolization of geniculate arteries supplying the hypervas­cular segments related to pain (Fig.26.9). The reduction in the blood supply of synovium results in decreased neovas­cularity and pain. The various embolic agents that can be used include imipenam/cilastin, embozene, or PVA particles [47]. In a meta-analysis, GAE resulted in signicant improvement in VAS (Visual Analogue Scale) and WOMAC score. Pain with better functional status and decreased need for pain medication [48].
330
M. Verma and N. N. Pandey

References

1. Yadav MK, Mohammed AKM, Puramadathil V, Geetha D, Unni M.Lower extremity arteries. Cardiovasc Diagn Ther. 2019;9(Suppl
1):S174–82.
2. Scheinert D, Werner M, Scheinert S, Paetzold A, Banning­Eichenseer U, Piorkowski M, etal. Treatment of complex atheroscle­rotic popliteal artery disease with a new self-expanding interwoven nitinol stent: 12-month results of the Leipzig SUPERA popliteal artery stent registry. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(1):65–71.
3. Dhaliwal G, Mukherjee D. Peripheral arterial disease: epide­miology, natural history, diagnosis and treatment. Int J Angiol. 2007;16(2):36–44.
4. Norgren L, Hiatt WR, Dormandy JA, Nehler MR, Harris KA, Fowkes FGR.Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC II). J Vasc Surg. 2007;45(1):S5–67.
5. Fontaine R, Kim M, Kieny R.Surgical treatment of peripheral cir­culation disorders. Helv Chir Acta. 1954;21(5–6):499–533.
6. Rutherford RB, Baker JD, Ernst C, Johnston KW, Porter JM, Ahn S, etal. Recommended standards for reports dealing with lower extrem­ity ischemia: revised version. J Vasc Surg. 1997;26(3):517–38.
7. Aboyans V, Ricco JB, Bartelink MLEL, Björck M, Brodmann M, Cohnert T, etal. 2017 ESC Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases, in collaboration with the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS): Document cover­ing atherosclerotic disease of extracranial carotid and vertebral, mesenteric, renal, upper and lower extremity arteries Endorsed by: the European Stroke Organization (ESO)The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Peripheral Arterial Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and of the European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS). Eur Heart J. 2018;39(9):763–816.
8. Aboyans V, Criqui MH, Abraham P, Allison MA, Creager MA, Diehm C, et al. Measurement and interpretation of the ankle­brachial index: a scientic statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation. 2012;126(24):2890–909.
9. Gerhard-Herman MD, Gornik HL, Barrett C, Barshes NR, Corriere MA, Drachman DE, et al. 2016 AHA/ACC Guideline on the Management of Patients With Lower Extremity Peripheral Artery Disease: Executive Summary: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;69(11):1465–508.
10. Bailey SR, Beckman JA, Dao TD, Misra S, Sobieszczyk PS, White CJ, et al. ACC/AHA/SCAI/SIR/SVM 2018Appropriate Use Criteria for PeripheralArtery Intervention: A Report of the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force, AmericanHeart Association, Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions, Societyof Interventional Radiology, and Society for Vascular Medicine. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019;73(2):214–37.
11. Park UJ, Kim HT, Roh YN.Factors affecting outcomes after endo­vascular treatment for femoropopliteal atherosclerotic lesions. Asian J Surg. 2019 Jan;42(1):209–16.
12. Mustapha JA, Saab F, McGoff T, Heaney C, Diaz-Sandoval L, Sevensma M, etal. Tibio-pedal arterial minimally invasive retro­grade revascularization in patients with advanced peripheral vas­cular disease: the TAMI technique, original case series. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;83(6):987–94.
13. Saab F, Jaff MR, Diaz-Sandoval LJ, Engen GD, McGoff TN, Adams G, etal. Chronic total occlusion crossing approach based on plaque cap morphology: the CTOP classication. J Endovasc Ther. 2018;25(3):284–91.
14. Giannopoulos S, Varcoe RL, Lichtenberg M, Rundback J, Brodmann M, Zeller T, etal. Balloon angioplasty of infrapopliteal arteries: a systematic review and proposed algorithm for optimal endovascular therapy. J Endovasc Ther. 2020;27(4):547–64.
15. Geronemus AR, Peña CS. Endovascular treatment of femoral­popliteal disease. Semin Interv Radiol. 2009;26(4):303–14.
16. Bosch JL, Hunink MG.Meta-analysis of the results of percutane­ous transluminal angioplasty and stent placement for aortoiliac occlusive disease. Radiology. 1997;204(1):87–96.
17. Klein WM, van der Graaf Y, Seegers J, Spithoven JH, Buskens E, van Baal JG, etal. Dutch iliac stent trial: long-term results in patients randomized for primary or selective stent placement. Radiology. 2006;238(2):734–44.
18. Goode SD, Cleveland TJ, Gaines PA. STAG trial collabora­tors. Randomized clinical trial of stents versus angioplasty for the treatment of iliac artery occlusions (STAG trial). Br J Surg. 2013;100(9):1148–53.
19. Mwipatayi BP, Sharma S, Daneshmand A, Thomas SD, Vijayan V, Altaf N, etal. Durability of the balloon-expandable covered versus bare-metal stents in the Covered versus Balloon Expandable Stent Trial (COBEST) for the treatment of aortoiliac occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 2016;64(1):83–94.e1.
20. Timaran CH, Prault TL, Stevens SL, Freeman MB, Goldman MH.Iliac artery stenting versus surgical reconstruction for TASC (TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus) type B and type C iliac lesions. J Vasc Surg. 2003;38(2):272–8.
21. Premaratne S, Newman J, Hobbs S, Garnham A, Wall M.Meta­analysis of direct surgical versus endovascular revascularization for aortoiliac occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg. 2020;72(2):726–37.
22. Antoniou GA, Chalmers N, Georgiadis GS, Lazarides MK, Antoniou SA, Serracino-Inglott F, etal. A meta-analysis of endo­vascular versus surgical reconstruction of femoropopliteal arterial disease. J Vasc Surg. 2013;57(1):242–53.
23. Schillinger M, Sabeti S, Dick P, Amighi J, Mlekusch W, Schlager O, etal. Sustained benet at 2 years of primary femoropopliteal stenting compared with balloon angioplasty with optional stenting. Circulation. 2007;115(21):2745–9.
24. Laird JR, Katzen BT, Scheinert D, Lammer J, Carpenter J, Buchbinder M, et al. Nitinol stent implantation vs. balloon angioplasty for lesions in the supercial femoral and proximal popliteal arteries of patients with claudication: three-year fol­low-up from the RESILIENT randomized trial. J Endovasc Ther. 2012;19(1):1–9.
25. Matsumura JS, Yamanouchi D, Goldstein JA, Pollock CW, Bosiers M, Schultz GA, et al. The United States StuDy for EvalUating EndovasculaR TreAtments of Lesions in the Supercial Femoral Artery and Proximal Popliteal By usIng the Protégé EverfLex NitInol STent SYstem II (DURABILITY II). J Vasc Surg. 2013;58(1):73–83.e1.
26. Acin F, de Haro J, Bleda S, Varela C, Esparza L.Primary nitinol stenting in femoropopliteal occlusive disease: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Endovasc Ther. 2012;19(5):585–95.
27. Garcia LA, Roseneld KR, Metzger CD, Zidar F, Pershad A, Popma JJ, et al. SUPERB nal 3-year outcomes using interwo­ven nitinol biomimetic supera stent. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2017;89(7):1259–67.
28. Bradbury AW, Adam DJ, Bell J, Forbes JF, Fowkes FGR, Gillespie I, etal. Bypass versus Angioplasty in Severe Ischaemia of the Leg (BASIL) trial: an intention-to-treat analysis of amputation-free and overall survival in patients randomized to a bypass surgery-rst or a balloon angioplasty-rst revascularization strategy. J Vasc Surg. 2010;51(5 Suppl):5S–17S.
29. Hsu CC, Kwan GN, Singh D, Rophael JA, Anthony C, van Driel ML.Angioplasty versus stenting for infrapopliteal arterial lesions in chronic limb-threatening ischaemia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;2018(12):CD009195.
30. Cejna M. Cutting balloon: review on principles and back­ground of use in peripheral arteries. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2005;28(4):400–8.
31. Kayssi A, Al-Atassi T, Oreopoulos G, Roche-Nagle G, Tan KT, Rajan DK.Drug-eluting balloon angioplasty versus uncoated bal­loon angioplasty for peripheral arterial disease of the lower limbs. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2016(8):CD011319.
26 Interventions oftheExtremity Arteries
331
32. Dake MD, Ansel GM, Jaff MR, Ohki T, Saxon RR, Smouse HB, etal. Durable clinical effectiveness with paclitaxel-eluting stents in the femoropopliteal artery: 5-year results of the Zilver PTX randomized trial. Circulation. 2016;133(15):1472–83. discussion 1483
33. Duda SH, Bosiers M, Lammer J, Scheinert D, Zeller T, Oliva V, etal. Drug-eluting and bare nitinol stents for the treatment of athero­sclerotic lesions in the supercial femoral artery: long-term results from the SIROCCO trial. J Endovasc Ther. 2006;13(6):701–10.
34. Lammer J, Bosiers M, Zeller T, Schillinger M, Boone E, Zaugg MJ, etal. First clinical trial of nitinol self-expanding everolimus-eluting stent implantation for peripheral arterial occlusive disease. J Vasc Surg [Internet]. 2011; Aug [cited 2022 Jun 21];54(2). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21658885/.
35. Fusaro M, Cassese S, Ndrepepa G, Tepe G, King L, Ott I, etal. Drug-eluting stents for revascularization of infrapopliteal arter­ies: updated meta-analysis of randomized trials. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(12):1284–93.
36. Galyfos G, Geropapas G, Stefanidis I, Kerasidis S, Stamatatos I, Kastrisios G, et al. Bioabsorbable stenting in peripheral artery disease. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med Mol Interv. 2015;16(8):480–3.
37. Kansal A, Long CA, Patel MR, Jones WS.Endovascular treatment of femoro-popliteal lesions. Clin Cardiol. 2018;42(1):175–83.
38. Wong CP, Chan LP, Au DM, Chan HWC, Chan YC.Efcacy and safety of intravascular lithotripsy in lower extremity peripheral artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2022;63(3):446–56.
39. Huizing E, Schreve MA, de Vries JPPM, Ferraresi R, Kum S, Ünlü Ç. Below-the-ankle angioplasty in patients with critical limb isch­emia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR. 2019;30(9):1361–1368.e2.
40. N’Dandu Z, Bonilla J, Yousef GM, White CJ. Percutaneous deep vein arterialization: an emerging technique for no-option chronic limb-threatening ischemia patients. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2021;97(4):685–90.
41. Sharma A, Sinha M, Pandey NN, Chandrashekhara SH.Stem cell therapy in critical limb ischemia: current scenario and future trends. Indian J Radiol Imaging. 2019;29(4):397–403.
42. Xie B, Luo H, Zhang Y, Wang Q, Zhou C, Xu D.Autologous stem cell therapy in critical limb ischemia: a meta-analysis of random­ized controlled trials. Stem Cells Int. 2018;2018:7528464.
43. Björck M, Earnshaw JJ, Acosta S, Bastos Gonçalves F, Cochennec F, Debus ES, et al. Editor’s choice – European Society for Vascular Surgery (ESVS) 2020 Clinical Practice Guidelines on the Management of Acute Limb Ischaemia. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2020;59(2):173–218.
44. Patel NH, Krishnamurthy VN, Kim S, Saad WE, Ganguli S, Walker TG, etal. Quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous man­agement of acute lower-extremity ischemia. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2013;24(1):3–15.
45. Darwood R, Berridge DC, Kessel DO, Robertson I, Forster R. Surgery versus thrombolysis for initial management of acute limb ischaemia. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;8:CD002784.
46. Eliahou R, Sosna J, Bloom AI.Between a rock and a hard place: clinical and imaging features of vascular compression syndromes. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc. 2012;32(1):E33–49.
47. Heller DB, Beggin AE, Lam AH, Kohi MP, Heller MB.Geniculate artery embolization: role in knee hemarthrosis and osteoarthritis. Radiogr Rev Publ Radiol Soc N Am Inc. 2022;42(1):289–301.
48. Torkian P, Golzarian J, Chalian M, Clayton A, Rahimi-Dehgolan S, Tabibian E, et al. Osteoarthritis-related knee pain treated with genicular artery embolization: a systematic review and meta­analysis. Orthop J Sports Med. 2021;9(7):23259671211021356.
Interventions oftheExtremity Veins
ReshamSingh andVineetaOjha
27
Key Messages
1. Chronic venous insufciency (CVI) results from venous valve dysfunction, leading to leg swelling, varicose veins, leg pain, and skin changes.
2. CVI carries a considerable burden on the healthcare sys­tem while also deteriorating patients and quality of life.
3. Endovascular management of varicose veins is a mini­mally invasive treatment option which provides faster recovery and improved cosmetic outcomes compared to surgery.
4. Different endovascular interventions for varicose veins include thermal ablative methods and non-thermal abla­tive methods.
5. Thermal ablative methods use thermal energy under perivenous tumescent anaesthesia and include endove­nous laser ablation (EVLA), radiofrequency ablation (RFA) and endovenous steam ablation (EVSA).
6. Non-thermal ablative methods include foam sclerother­apy, cyanoacrylate glue, mechanochemical ablation and cryosclerosis, which involve inciting endothelial dam­age to venous wall leading to venous thrombosis and brosis.
7. In deep venous thrombosis (DVT), endovascular man­agement is mainly done in patients with severe symp­toms of extensive iliofemoral DVT who have a reasonable life expectancy.
8. Different endovascular interventions in DVT include catheter-directed thrombectomy, catheter-directed thrombolysis, or pharmacomechanical catheter-directed thrombolysis.
9. Different endovascular interventions in pulmonary embolism (PE) also include catheter-directed thrombol­ysis or catheter-directed thrombectomy (if thrombolysis is contraindicated).
R. Singh · V. Ojha (*) Department of Cardiovascular Radiology and Endovascular Interventions, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Delhi, India
10. Endovascular intervention in PE is done in acute mas­sive PE or submissive PE with RV strain pattern if sys­temic thrombolysis is contraindicated.

27.1 Introduction

The individual, mental and societal burden caused by venous disorders is considerable, and the beginning of different interventions in veins of extremities for varicose veins dates back to 1500BC [1]. There has been a continuous evolution in endovascular intervention from performing the rst attempts of venous thrombectomy in DVT (in the early 1920s) to venous stents and mechanical thrombectomy in the previous two to three decades to treat a complicated disorder of the lower limb venous system. The surgical method of treatment in chronic venous insufciency has been associ­ated with high recurrence rates (up to 60%), neurovascular injuries and more postoperative complications [2]. Success rates after endovenous techniques, for example, radiofre­quency ablation (RFA) and endovenous laser ablation (EVLA) are excellent in chronic venous insufciency. So in this chapter, we will be discussing the diseases affecting the extremities of peripheral veins and different interventions in detail.

27.2 Relevant Anatomy

Classical venous vascular anatomy elaborated in the litera­ture is present in less than 16% of individuals [3]. There are marked embryological variations and developmental anoma­lies in the lower limb. The lower limb venous system consists of deep veins, supercial veins and perforating veins which are described by their relationships and proximity to muscular fascia. The deep veins primarily drain muscles and travel in close vicinity of arteries of the lower limb. The supercial veins run in subcutaneous space and drain pri­marily the cutaneous and subcutaneous microcirculation.
© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2024 S. H. Chandrashekhara (ed.), Textbook of Interventional Radiology, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-9601-4_27
333
334
b
R. Singh and V. Ojha
The supercial venous system consists of a small saphenous vein (SSV), a great saphenous vein (GSV) and various venous tributaries. Perforating veins connect the supercial veins to deep veins after traversing the muscular fascia.

27.3 Varicose Veins

Varicose veins are dilated, tortuous supercial venous chan­nels and represent venous dysfunction which occurs due to venous valvular incompetence. This incompetence of valves can occur in supercial, perforating and/or deep veins which leads to the ow reversal and resultant venous hypertension in the lower limb venous system. The cause of valvular incompetence is multifactorial, which mostly occurs because of
• Pathological dilatation of supercial vein.
• Post-thrombotic syndrome occurring as a result of recan­alization of deep venous thrombosis (DVT).
• Congenital absence/hypoplastic valves.
Varicose veins include spider veins, reticular veins and
true varicosities. The signicantly high prevalence of chronic venous insufciency in the general population, high patient morbidity and the cost of treating its complications contrib­ute to a signicant burden on healthcare resources and patient nancial status [4].
27.3.2 Physical Examination
Physical examination includes signs of CVI, size, location of varicosities and venous ulcer if present and lastly status of the arterial system. There are many clinical classications/scor­ing systems available in the literature which are used to elabo­rate these varicose veins. CEAP classication is the most commonly used classication to narrate the varicose veins (Fig.27.1). In general, the CEAP clinical classes stand for:
C0: none. C1: telangiectasia. C2: varicosity. C3: oedema. C4: skin changes.
C4a: pigmentation or eczema.
C4b: lipodermatosclerosis or atrophie blanche. C5: healed ulcer. C6: active ulcer.
Recently, there have been certain additions in the above classication like corona phlebectasia as the C4c subclass, and “r” was added for recurrent ulcers or varicose veins and the numeric descriptions of the venous segments were replaced with their common abbreviations.
27.3.3 Sonological Evaluation
27.3.3.1 Duplex Sonographical Evaluation
27.3.1 Clinical Evaluation
A detailed history of patient with chronic venous insuf­ciency is must, and it includes the nature and duration of clinical symptoms, previous history of deep venous throm­bosis and prior treatments for varicose veins.
a
Fig. 27.1 Varicose vein CEAP classication. (a) Varicose Vein—C2, (b) Oedema—C3, (c) skin changes—lipodermatosclerosis—C4, (d) active ulcer—C6, (e) healed ulcer—C6
c
Duplex sonographical evaluation is the investigation of choice and primary diagnostic modality for chronic venous insuf­ciency. A number of patient positioning have been described for duplex sonography in the literature which include
Standing on an examination bed. Combination of standing and sitting/supine position.
de
27 Interventions oftheExtremity Veins
335
Lying position 0-degree tilt. Lying on a tilt table in reverse-Trendelenburg position at
30° or 60° incline.
Sonographical evaluation of varicose veins includes
assessment of
• The saphenofemoral (SFJ) or saphenopopliteal (SPJ) junctional incompetence.
• Truncal veins (GSV) diameter at proximal thigh ~2cm below saphenofemoral junction, mid-thigh level and just above the knee.
• Supercial telangiectasia/reticular vein/varicosities/ in the lower limb.
• Location and diameter of incompetent perforators (loca­tion described as a distance from xed bony landmarks).
• Deep venous reux.
• Presence of DVT: It is of utmost importance to preclude DVT before taking the patient for endovascular ablative procedure as it can be extremely catastrophic to perform ablation in signicantly occluded deep veins.
27.3.4 Current Consensus among Dierent
Vascular Societies
The current consensus among different vascular societies recommends the cut-off time for valvular incompetence
with the reux duration of
• 1 second in common femoral vein, supercial femoral vein (SFV) and popliteal vein (PV)
• 0.5s for great saphenous veins (GSV) and short saphe­nous veins (SSV), deep femoral and calf veins
• 0.35s for lower limb perforators.
27.3.5 Endovascular Interventions forVaricose
Veins
27.3.5.1 Thermal Ablation
Endothermal ablative techniques are highly efcacious methods of treatment of chronic venous insufciency as compared to surgery [5]. Thermal ablation techniques include endovenous laser ablation (EVLA), endovenous steam ablation (EVSA) and radiofrequency ablation (RFA). All these endothermal ablation techniques use thermal energy and involve the administration of perivenous tumes­cent anaesthesia. The perivenous administration of tumes­cent anaesthesia acts as a sink to the heat generated during thermal ablation in addition to the anaesthesia [6]. It also collapses the venous lumen and increases the area of contact between the endovenous laser/catheter and the venous wall.
Endovenous Laser Ablation
This procedure involves the administration of endoluminal laser energy (Fig. 27.3). In the past two decades, signicant evolution in EVLA’s laser bres has happened with higher wavelength lasers making ablation of signicantly dilated veins (5–15mm) possible. The mechanism of action includes damage and perforations in the venous wall caused by the laser energy due to direct contact as well as due to super­heated steam bubbles resulting in injury to the endothelium of the wall resulting in the thickening, contraction and bro­sis of the venous wall [7].
Procedure GSV is punctured at the knee with a needle of 16–18G in the Trendelenburg position, followed by the intro­duction of vascular sheath. Laser bre is introduced through vascular sheath and is advanced up to 2cm caudal to the saphenofemoral junction and is conrmed with sonography followed by tumescent anaesthesia administration (Fig. 27.3). Laser is then red and supercial vein is ablated with slow withdrawal of the laser bre. The withdrawal rate of laser bres in continuous mode is 2–4mm/sec and is stepwise at 10–15W power if red in pulsed mode. It has been found that the pulsed mode leads to more complications than the con­tinuous mode, so the continuous mode is usually preferred over the pulsed mode [8]. There are laser bres of different wavelengths available ranging from 810 to 1920 nm. Laser bres of lower wavelength use haemoglobin as chromophore, and water is used as chromophore in higher wavelength laser bres. 1470nm wavelength laser bres are most commonly used nowadays. It has been found that higher wavelength laser bres are more efcient in energy transmission and result in high occlusion rate. Higher wavelength laser bres lead to less post-operative complications like pain and skin discolouration [9]. After the procedure, patients are told to use compression bandages and advised to do their daily activ­ities immediately. A follow-up sonogram is done 24h after the procedure to assess and conrm the ablation of the super­cial vein and rule out deep vein thrombosis(Fig. 27.4).
C/I to this procedure includes targeted supercial vein thrombosis, deep vein thrombosis, pregnancy and critical limb ischaemia secondary to arterial disease.
Procedural success of this intervention ranges between 96% and 100% with a success rate of up to 90–94% at 3years and 85–88% at 5years [10]. But recurrence rates are very similar to the surgical methods (33.3%) at 5years after the EVLA (36.6%) [11].
Complications Most common side effects include ecchy-
moses and pain. Rare complications include burns, DVT, nerve injury and pulmonary embolism [12]. Other rare com­plications of EVLA include endovenous heat-induced throm­bosis (EHIT) in which there occur thrombus extension into deep veins with an incidence of 0–5.6%.
336
Fig. 27.2 Ultrasound-guided foam sclerotherapy (UGFS) procedure: Under aseptic precautions and USG guidance, varicosities are punctured with buttery cannula (a, b). Venogram of varicosities is obtained to assess any communication with deep veins and the amount of contrast injected (c). Foam sclerosant is prepared with the Tessari method and the same amount of foam sclerosant by buttery cannula (d)
R. Singh and V. Ojha
a
b
cd
Radiofrequency Ablation
RFA is a thermal ablative technique used to obliterate reux­ing supercial veins and was approved by the FDA in 1999.
In RFA, high-frequency alternating current of tempera­ture 80–120°C is passed to the supercial vein by RFA cath­eter which results in heating, loss of vascular architecture and disintegration of the vessel.
Procedure The initial step of the RFA procedure is similar
to EVLA.The catheter is advanced to 2–3cm caudal to the saphenofemoral junction. Temperature, impedance and gen­erator output should be monitored, and the rate of withdrawal adjusted accordingly during the procedure. The procedural success, recurrence and occlusion rates for RFA are largely similar to EVLA [13]..
Complications of RFA Post-procedural pain and ecchymo­sis are less frequent than that with EVLA [13]. The DVT incidence after RFA is slightly higher than EVLA with a reported incidence of 0.2–1.4%, which is slightly higher in patients with RFA compared to EVLA [14]. The rest of the procedural complications of RFA are very similar to the EVLA.
Endovenous Steam Ablation
The procedural steps of EVSA are similar to endovenous laser ablation. But once the tumescent anaesthesia is admin­istered, pulses of steam at ~120°C as 3–4 puffs are delivered each at 1cm intervals in the supercial vein to be ablated. The procedural success is similar to EVLA at 1year. But it has been found that EVSA is associated with lesser pain and time to recovery and more satisfaction rates compared to EVLA [15].
27.3.5.2 Non-thermal Ablative Methods
Foam Sclerotherapy
Venosclerotherapy under USG guidance is based on the usage of the physical and biochemical properties of a scle­rosant (Fig.27.2). Selective intravenous delivery of a scle­rosant causes endothelial damage and resultant brosis and thrombosis. The most commonly used sclerosant in veno­sclerotherapy are polidocanol and sodium tetradocyl sul­phate. Sclerotherapy also produces other effects like denaturation of proteins, protein extraction from lipids, cell dehydration by osmosis and luminal obstruction by polymer­ization of sclerosant.
27 Interventions oftheExtremity Veins
Fig. 27.3 EVLA procedure. Under aseptic precaution, EVLA is done after taking venous access with 6 French vascular sheath (a) and laser bre (b) advanced in GSV/ SSV 2cm below SFJ/SPJ (c). Perivenous tumescent anaesthesia is administered under USG guidance (d)
337
a
c
abc
b
d
Fig. 27.4 Laser bre is red (a) with continuous withdrawal (b) and the amount of energy used is noted (c)
Technique Percutaneous introduction of buttery needle is
done in supercial varicosity till retrograde ow of blood is observed in buttery cannula followed by venogram. Sclerosant foam is injected slowly into the vein (amount var­ies from case to case). The Tessari method is the most com­monly used method of foam preparation (Fig.27.2). Local
compression is applied after injection for 5–10min. If patent venous channels remain after sclerotherapy on follow-up USG, second- stage venosclerotherapy can be planned after 6–8 weeks. Some contraindications to venosclerotherapy include hypersensitivity to the sclerosant, skin infection and deep venous thrombosis.