New to MyHealth?
Manage Your Care From Anywhere.
Access your health information from any device with MyHealth. You can message your clinic, view lab results, schedule an appointment, and pay your bill.
ALREADY HAVE AN ACCESS CODE?
DON'T HAVE AN ACCESS CODE?
NEED MORE DETAILS?
MyHealth for Mobile
Get the iPhone MyHealth app »
Get the Android MyHealth app »
Abstract
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.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.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.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.
View details for Web of Science ID A1995RC62600011
View details for PubMedID 7647439