Purpose: To quantitatively evaluate the impact of carotid stent cell design on vessel scaffolding by using patient-specific finite element analysis of carotid artery stenting (CAS). Methods: The study was organized in 2 parts: (1) validation of a patient-specific finite element analysis of CAS and (2) evaluation of vessel scaffolding. Micro-computed tomography (CT) images of an open-cell stent deployed in a patient-specific silicone mock artery were compared with the corresponding finite element analysis results. This simulation was repeated for the closed-cell counterpart. In the second part, the stent strut distribution, as reflected by the inter-strut angles, was evaluated for both cell types in different vessel cross sections as a measure of scaffolding. Results: The results of the patient-specific finite element analysis of CAS matched well with experimental stent deployment both qualitatively and quantitatively, demonstrating the reliability of the numerical approach. The measured inter-strut angles suggested that the closed-cell design provided superior vessel scaffolding compared to the open-cell counterpart. However, the full strut interconnection of the closed-cell design reduced the stent's ability to accommodate to the irregular eccentric profile of the vessel cross section, leading to a gap between the stent surface and the vessel wall. Conclusion: Even though this study was limited to a single stent design and one vascular anatomy, the study confirmed the capability of dedicated computer simulations to predict differences in scaffolding by open-and closed-cell carotid artery stents. These simulations have the potential to be used in the design of novel carotid stents or for procedure planning. J Endovasc Ther. 2011; 18: 397-406

Impact of Carotid Stent Cell Design on Vessel Scaffolding: A Case Study Comparing Experimental Investigation and Numerical Simulations

CONTI, MICHELE;AURICCHIO, FERDINANDO;ODERO, ATTILIO NICOLO'
2011-01-01

Abstract

Purpose: To quantitatively evaluate the impact of carotid stent cell design on vessel scaffolding by using patient-specific finite element analysis of carotid artery stenting (CAS). Methods: The study was organized in 2 parts: (1) validation of a patient-specific finite element analysis of CAS and (2) evaluation of vessel scaffolding. Micro-computed tomography (CT) images of an open-cell stent deployed in a patient-specific silicone mock artery were compared with the corresponding finite element analysis results. This simulation was repeated for the closed-cell counterpart. In the second part, the stent strut distribution, as reflected by the inter-strut angles, was evaluated for both cell types in different vessel cross sections as a measure of scaffolding. Results: The results of the patient-specific finite element analysis of CAS matched well with experimental stent deployment both qualitatively and quantitatively, demonstrating the reliability of the numerical approach. The measured inter-strut angles suggested that the closed-cell design provided superior vessel scaffolding compared to the open-cell counterpart. However, the full strut interconnection of the closed-cell design reduced the stent's ability to accommodate to the irregular eccentric profile of the vessel cross section, leading to a gap between the stent surface and the vessel wall. Conclusion: Even though this study was limited to a single stent design and one vascular anatomy, the study confirmed the capability of dedicated computer simulations to predict differences in scaffolding by open-and closed-cell carotid artery stents. These simulations have the potential to be used in the design of novel carotid stents or for procedure planning. J Endovasc Ther. 2011; 18: 397-406
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11571/436080
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 8
  • Scopus 35
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 29
social impact