4.5 Article

Suggestion of potential stent design parameters to reduce restenosis risk driven by foreshortening or dogboning due to non-uniform balloon-stent expansion

期刊

ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
卷 36, 期 7, 页码 1118-1129

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-008-9504-1

关键词

stent; foreshortening; dogboning; transient non-uniform balloon expansion; finite element analysis

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea [과C6B2505] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The foreshortening or dogboning of a stent that occurs due to transient non-uniform balloon-stent expansion can induce a vascular injury, resulting in restenosis of the coronary artery. However, previous studies rarely considered the effects of transient non-uniform balloon expansion on analysis of the mechanical properties and behaviors of stents during stent deployment, nor did they determine design parameters to minimize the restenosis risk driven by foreshortening or dogboning. The aim of the current study was, therefore, to suggest potential design parameters capable of reducing the possibility of restenosis risk driven by foreshortening or dogboning through a comparative study of seven commercial stents using finite element (FE) analyses of a realistic transient non-uniform balloon-stent expansion process. The results indicate that using stents composed of opened unit cells connected by bend-shaped link structures, in particular the MAC Plus stent, and controlling the geometrical and morphological features of the unit cell strut or the link structure at the distal ends of stent may prevent restenosis risk caused by foreshortening or dogboning. This study provides a first look at the realistic transient non-uniform balloon-stent expansion by investigating the mechanical properties, behaviors, and design parameters capable of reducing the possibility of restenosis risk induced by the foreshortening or the dogboning.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据