Hydrophilic guidewires: evaluation and comparison of their properties and safety.

OBJECTIVE

To compare physical and mechanical properties of 10 commercially available hydrophilic guidewires.

METHODS

In vitro testing was performed to evaluate 10 different straight hydrophilic guidewires (5 regular and 5 stiff wires): Glidewire, NiCore, EZ Glider, Hiwire, and Zipwire. The forces required for tip perforation, tip bending, shaft bending, and friction during movement were measured for all 10 wires. The tip contour was measured using high power light microscopy.

RESULTS

The Glidewire required the greatest force to perforate our model (P = .01). The EZ Glider, Zipwire, and Glidewire had the lowest tip bending forces (P <.001). The Glidewire had the stiffest shaft (P <.001). The EZ Glider and Glidewire required the greatest forces in the friction test (P <.001). Regarding the stiff guidewires, the GlidewireS required the greatest force in the perforation test (P ≤.05). The GlidewireS and EZ GliderS required the lowest tip bending force (P ≤.004). The ZipwireS and NiCoreS had the stiffest shafts (P ≤.01). The GlidewireS required the greatest force in the friction test (P <.001). Measurement of the tip contour showed the Zipwire, HiwireS, and EZ GliderS had the roundest tips.

CONCLUSION

Each wire has unique properties with advantages and disadvantages. The Glidewires (both stiff and regular) have the lowest potential for perforation, although they are less slippery. The Glidewire and EZ Glider required the least tip force to bend around a point of obstruction.