Why the study?
Preclinical studies employ highly variable in vitro cell systems, animal models, and experimental assays to assess bioresorbable metallic stent biocompatibility, making definitive conclusions difficult.
This review highlights the variability in preclinical models used to assess bioresorbable metallic stents and provides recommendations for standardizing biocompatibility evaluations.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Should not yet change practice for these stents; leaves open standardized preclinical models before reliable clinical translation.
Cardiovascular stents are widely used to treat atherosclerosis by relieving vascular obstruction and providing structural support after coronary angioplasty. Bioresorbable metallic stents represent a promising alternative to conventional corrosion-resistant stents, which are linked to late-stage complications such as in-stent restenosis and thrombosis. Due to the diversity of stent materials and designs, rigorous evaluation of their interactions with the vascular environment in relevant preclinical models is essential before clinical translation. However, current studies employ highly variable in vitro cell systems, in vivo animal models, and experimental assays to assess biocompatibility, making it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about candidate designs. This review outlines the current landscape of bioresorbable metallic stents, critically examines the strengths and limitations of preclinical models described in the literature and in international guidelines, and provides recommendations to guide future research in this rapidly evolving field.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bùi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: