4.5 Article

In Vitro, Time-Resolved PIV Comparison of the Effect of Stent Design on Wall Shear Stress

期刊

ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
卷 37, 期 7, 页码 1310-1321

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-009-9697-y

关键词

Coronary arteries; Blood flow; Phase offset; Oscillatory shear index; Drug-eluting stent; Bare metal stent; Endothelial cells

资金

  1. National Science Foundation [0547434]
  2. Directorate For Engineering
  3. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [0547434] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The effect of stent design on wall shear stress (WSS) and oscillatory shear index (OSI) was studied in vitro using time-resolved digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV). Four drug-eluting stents [XIENCE V-A (R) (Abbott Vascular), TAXUS(A (R)) Libert,(A (R)) (Boston Scientific), Endeavor(A (R)) (Medtronic), and Cypher(A (R)) (J&J Cordis)] and a bare-metal stent [VISIONA (R) (Abbott Vascular)] were implanted into compliant vessel models, and the flow was measured in physiologically accurate coronary conditions featuring reversal and realistic offsets between pressure and flowrate. DPIV measurements were made at three locations under two different flow rates (resting: Re = 160, f = 70 bpm and exercise: Re = 300, f = 120 bpm). It was observed that design substantially affected the WSS experienced at the vessel walls. Averaged values between struts ranged from 2.05 dynes/cm(2) (Cypher(A (R))) to 8.52 dynes/cm(2) (XIENCE V-A (R)) in resting conditions, and from 3.72 dynes/cm(2) (Cypher(A (R))) to 14.66 dynes/cm(2) (VISIONA (R)) for the exercise state. Within the stent, the WSS dropped and the OSI increased immediately distal to each strut. In addition, an inverse correlation between average WSS and OSI existed. Comparisons with recently published results from animal studies show strong correlation between the measured WSS and observed endothelial cell coverage. These results suggest the importance of stent design on the WSS experienced by endothelial cells in coronary arteries.

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