ArticlePloS one2020
Computational analysis of the effects of geometric irregularities and post-processing steps on the mechanical behavior of additively manufactured 316L stainless steel stents.
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hemocompatibility and cytotoxicity evaluation of additively manufactured and surface-treated 316 L stainless steel aortic stents using laser powder bed fusion (L-PBF).Journal of materials science. Materials in medicine · 2026Article
- Structural Design and Mechanical Properties of Metal Vascular Stents Fabricated via Laser Powder Bed Fusion.ACS omega · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Advances in additive manufacturing enable the production of tailored lattice structures and thus, in principle, coronary stents. This study investigates the effects of process-related irregularities, heat and surface treatment on the morphology, mechanical response, and expansion behavior of 316L stainless steel stents produced by laser powder bed fusion and provides a methodological approach for their numerical evaluation. A combined experimental and computational framework is used, based on both actual and computationally reconstructed laser powder bed fused stents. Process-related morphological deviations between the as-designed and actual laser powder bed fused stents were observed, resulting in a diameter increase by a factor of 2-2.6 for the stents without surface treatment and 1.3-2 for the electropolished stent compared to the as-designed stent. Thus, due to the increased geometrically induced stiffness, the laser powder bed fused stents in the as-built (7.11 ± 0.63 N) or the heat treated condition (5.87 ± 0.49 N) showed increased radial forces when compressed between two plates. After electropolishing, the heat treated stents exhibited radial forces (2.38 ± 0.23 N) comparable to conventional metallic stents. The laser powder bed fused stents were further affected by the size effect, resulting in a reduced yield strength by 41% in the as-built and by 59% in the heat treated condition compared to the bulk material obtained from tensile tests. The presented numerical approach was successful in predicting the macroscopic mechanical response of the stents under compression. During deformation, increased stiffness and local stress concentration were observed within the laser powder bed fused stents. Subsequent numerical expansion analysis of the derived stent models within a previously verified numerical model of stent expansion showed that electropolished and heat treated laser powder bed fused stents can exhibit comparable expansion behavior to conventional stents. The findings from this work motivate future experimental/numerical studies to quantify threshold values of critical geometric irregularities, which could be used to establish design guidelines for laser powder bed fused stents/lattice structures.
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.