4.6 Article

Compliance Study of Endovascular Stent Grafts Incorporated with Polyester and Polyurethane Graft Materials in both Stented and Unstented Zones

Journal

Materials
Volume 9, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/ma9080658

Keywords

stent graft; compliance; stented zone; unstented zone; PU; PET

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81371648]
  2. Shanghai Construction of College Experiment Technique Team Project [101-07-0053014]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [15D110126, BCZD2016011]
  4. 111 Project Biomedical Textile Materials Science and Technology [B07024]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Compliance mismatch between stent graft and host artery may induce complications and blood flow disorders. However, few studies have been reported on stent graft compliance. This study aims to explore the deformation and compliance of stent graft in stented and unstented zones under three pressure ranges. Compliance of two stent grafts incorporated with polyurethane graft (nitinol-PU) and polyester graft (nitinol-PET) materials respectively were tested; the stents used in the two stent grafts were identical. For the circumferential deformation of the stent grafts under each pressure range, the nitinol-PET stent graft was uniform in both zones. The nitinol-PU stent graft was circumferentially uniform in the stented zone, however, it was nonuniform in the unstented zone. The compliance of the PU graft material was 15 times higher than that of the PET graft. No significant difference in compliance was observed between stented and unstented zones of the nitinol-PET stent graft regardless of the applied pressure range. However, for the nitinol-PU stent graft, compliance of the unstented PU region was approximately twice that of the stented region; thus, compliance along the length of the nitinol-PU stent graft was not constant and different from that of the nitinol-PET stent graft.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available