ArticleJournal of biomechanics2018
Quantification of thrombus formation in malapposed coronary stents deployed in vitro through imaging analysis.
Article in Journal of biomechanics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- [Structural design and biomechanical numerical analysis of body-fitted stent in stenotic vessels].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2021Article
- Long-term (beyond 5 years) clinical impact of Xience everolimus-eluting stent implantation.Health science reports · 2021Article
- Midterm Clinical Impacts of Biodegradable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents Compared with Durable Polymer Everolimus-Eluting Stents: A 3-Year Propensity-Matched Study.Journal of interventional cardiology · 2020Observational
- Comparative Analysis of Three Different Optimization Procedures for Coronary Bifurcation Provisional Stenting: Insights from Micro-Computed Tomography and Optical Coherence Tomography Imaging of Bench Deployments.Acta Cardiologica Sinica · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Stent thrombosis is a major complication of coronary stent and scaffold intervention. While often unanticipated and lethal, its incidence is low making mechanistic examination difficult through clinical investigation alone. Thus, throughout the technological advancement of these devices, experimental models have been indispensable in furthering our understanding of device safety and efficacy. As we refine model systems to gain deeper insight into adverse events, it is equally important that we continue to refine our measurement methods. We used digital signal processing in an established flow loop model to investigate local flow effects due to geometric stent features and ultimately its relationship to thrombus formation. A new metric of clot distribution on each microCT slice termed normalized clot ratio was defined to quantify this distribution. Three under expanded coronary bare-metal stents were run in a flow loop model to induce clotting. Samples were then scanned in a MicroCT machine and digital signal processing methods applied to analyze geometric stent conformation and spatial clot formation. Results indicated that geometric stent features play a significant role in clotting patterns, specifically at a frequency of 0.6225 Hz corresponding to a geometric distance of 1.606 mm. The magnitude-squared coherence between geometric features and clot distribution was greater than 0.4 in all samples. In stents with poor wall apposition, ranging from 0.27 mm to 0.64 mm maximum malapposition (model of real-world heterogeneity), clots were found to have formed in between stent struts rather than directly adjacent to struts. This early work shows how the combination of tools in the areas of image processing and signal analysis can advance the resolution at which we are able to define thrombotic mechanisms in in vitro models, and ultimately, gain further insight into clinical performance.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.