Comparative effectiveness of intravascular stents in resisting arterial vasoconstriction: evaluation with use of intact elastic (rabbit aorta) and muscular (dog carotid) arteries in an ex vivo model.

PURPOSE

The ability of three different intravascular stents (Gianturco-Roubin, Palmaz-Schatz, and CV Rad), and two different metals (stainless steel and tantalum) to resist vasoconstriction was evaluated in an intact artery ex vivo model.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Stents were deployed in 21 rabbit thoracic aortae and five dog carotid arteries, which were constricted with phenylephrine and serotonin, respectively. Vasoconstriction was measured with the use of high-frequency ultrasonic imaging.

RESULTS

The maximal vasoconstriction of the control segment was 37.7% +/- 2.6 with rabbit aortae and 36.3% +/- 4.1 with dog carotid arteries, while the average maximal constriction for all segments in which stents were placed was 5.7% +/- 1.1 (P < .01). The maximal constriction of the Gianturco-Roubin stainless steel stent was 9.4% +/- 2.7 versus 7.9% +/- 1.6 with the tantalum version (P = .65). Both designs showed somewhat greater constriction compared with either the Palmaz-Schatz (3.3% +/- 0.9) or the CV Rad (1.4% +/- 1.1) stents.

CONCLUSIONS

Although all of the stents tested substantially resist arterial vasoconstrictive forces, the Palmaz-Schatz and CV Rad stents resist vasoconstriction to a greater degree than the Gianturco-Roubin stents. Tantalum and stainless steel stents of the same design (Gianturco-Roubin) appear similar in their ability to resist vasoconstrictive forces.