Key result
Virtual carotid stenting showed open-cell stents had larger malapposed areas (29.5 vs 14.8 mm2) but smaller atherogenic (67.6 vs 104.9 mm2) risk areas than closed-cell stents.
Why the study?
Does open-cell versus closed-cell stent design affect hemodynamic parameters and stent apposition in a computational model of carotid artery stenting?
Population
Patient-specific left carotid artery reconstructed from CT angiography (computational model)
Comparison
Virtual implantation of an open-cell stent… vs Virtual implantation of a closed-cell stent
Design
Preclinical
Authors
Loading...
Should not yet guide carotid stent selection; leaves open the clinical relevance of simulated design-specific malapposition and atherogenic risks.
Does open-cell versus closed-cell stent design affect hemodynamic parameters and stent apposition in a computational model of carotid artery stenting?
Computational simulations of carotid artery stenting demonstrate a trade-off between cross-sectional size, flow resistance, malapposition, and atherogenic/thrombogenic risks that is dependent on open versus closed-cell stent design.
Santis et al. (2013) studied Carotid artery stenting (n=1). Open-cell stent design vs. Closed-cell stent design was evaluated on Hemodynamic impact including cross-sectional area, flow resistance, incomplete stent apposition, and atherogenic/thrombogenic risk. Virtual carotid stenting showed open-cell stents had larger malapposed areas (29.5 vs 14.8 mm2) but smaller atherogenic (67.6 vs 104.9 mm2) risk areas than closed-cell stents.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: