Suppr超能文献

五种神经血管支架血流导向性能的体外血管造影比较

In vitro angiographic comparison of the flow-diversion performance of five neurovascular stents.

作者信息

Dholakia Ronak J, Kappel Ari D, Pagano Andrew, Woo Henry H, Lieber Baruch B, Fiorella David J, Sadasivan Chander

机构信息

Department of Neurological Surgery, 12301 Stony Brook University , Stony Brook, NY, USA.

出版信息

Interv Neuroradiol. 2018 Apr;24(2):150-161. doi: 10.1177/1591019917748317. Epub 2017 Dec 14.

Abstract

Background and purpose Data differentiating flow diversion properties of commercially available low- and high-porosity stents are limited. This in vitro study applies angiographic analysis of intra-aneurysmal flow to compare the flow-diversion performance of five neurovascular devices in idealized sidewall and bifurcation aneurysm models. Methods Five commercial devices (Enterprise, Neuroform, LVIS, FRED, and Pipeline) were implanted in silicone sidewall and bifurcation aneurysm models under physiological average flow of blood analog fluid. High-speed angiographic images were acquired pre- and post-device implantation and contrast concentration-time curves within the aneurysm were recorded. The curves were quantified with five parameters to assess changes in contrast transport, and thus aneurysm hemodynamics, due to each device. Results Inter-device flow-diversion performance was more easily distinguished in the sidewall model than the bifurcation model. There were no obvious overall statistical trends in the bifurcation parameters but the Pipeline performed marginally better than the other devices. In the sidewall geometry, overall evidence suggests that the LVIS performed better than the Neuroform and Enterprise. The Pipeline and FRED devices were statistically superior to the three stents and Pipeline was superior to FRED in all sidewall parameters evaluated. Conclusions Based on this specific set of experiments, lower-porosity flow diverters perform significantly better in reducing intra-aneurysmal flow activity than higher-porosity stents in sidewall-type geometries. The LVIS device is potentially a better flow diverter than the Neuroform and Enterprise devices, while the Pipeline is potentially better than the FRED.

摘要

背景与目的

区分市售低孔隙率和高孔隙率支架血流导向特性的数据有限。本体外研究应用动脉瘤内血流的血管造影分析,以比较五种神经血管装置在理想化侧壁和分叉动脉瘤模型中的血流导向性能。方法:将五种商用装置(Enterprise、Neuroform、LVIS、FRED和Pipeline)植入硅胶侧壁和分叉动脉瘤模型中,模拟生理平均血流。在装置植入前后采集高速血管造影图像,并记录动脉瘤内的对比剂浓度-时间曲线。用五个参数对曲线进行量化,以评估每种装置导致的对比剂传输变化,进而评估动脉瘤血流动力学变化。结果:与分叉模型相比,在侧壁模型中更容易区分不同装置间的血流导向性能。分叉参数方面没有明显的总体统计趋势,但Pipeline的表现略优于其他装置。在侧壁几何形状中,总体证据表明LVIS比Neuroform和Enterprise表现更好。Pipeline和FRED装置在统计学上优于三种支架,且在所有评估的侧壁参数中Pipeline均优于FRED。结论:基于这组特定实验,在侧壁型几何形状中,低孔隙率血流导向装置在降低动脉瘤内血流活动方面的表现明显优于高孔隙率支架。LVIS装置可能比Neuroform和Enterprise装置是更好的血流导向装置,而Pipeline可能比FRED更好。

相似文献

2
Hemodynamics of Flow Diverters.血流导向装置的血流动力学
J Biomech Eng. 2017 Feb 1;139(2). doi: 10.1115/1.4034932.
5
Hemodynamic differences between Pipeline and coil-adjunctive intracranial stents.血流动力学差异:Pipeline 与 coil-辅助颅内支架。
J Neurointerv Surg. 2019 Sep;11(9):908-911. doi: 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014439. Epub 2019 Feb 27.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

5
Hemodynamics of Flow Diverters.血流导向装置的血流动力学
J Biomech Eng. 2017 Feb 1;139(2). doi: 10.1115/1.4034932.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验