Comparison of Nonuniform Strut Distribution between Two Drug-Eluting Stent Platforms

Materials and Methods

Bench-top model and stent deployment. An experimental model using a silicon tube was performed on 3 x 18 mm Bx Velocity (n = 6) and 3 x 16 mm Express II stents (n = 6), as previously described.⁷ In our experiment, straight and bending (curvature 0.33 cm-1) models made of silicon tube (inner diameter of 3 mm) were used. Stents were implanted at the inflation pressure of 10 atm, and the pressure was subsequently increased to 16 and 26 atm.
IVUS acquisition and measurements. IVUS imaging was performed following each inflation. Motorized pullback IVUS imaging was performed at 0.5 mm/second throughout the stent, with a 3.2 Fr 40 MHz IVUS imaging system (Boston Scientific). Three-dimensional IVUS volumetric analysis was performed using the EchoPlaque system (INDEC Systems, Inc., Mountain View, California).⁸ Stent volume index (SVI) was calculated as stent volume divided by stent length. The maximum angle between adjacent struts with a protractor centered on the stent was defined as interstrut angle (IA) (Figure 1).⁷ NSD was defined as IA > 90°, and NSD segment was defined as any segment within a stent in which NSD could be continuously observed for more than 0.5 mm longitudinally. Percent NSD was defined as the length of segments with NSD divided by stent length. Protrusion was defined as prolapse of tissue between stent struts extending inside a circular arc connecting adjacent struts.
Human clinical cases. To assess the NSD in human clinical cases, 53 patients (32 Cypher and 21 Taxus) who met the following criteria were identified from the IVUS database of the core laboratory at Stanford University (Stanford, California): (1) de novo coronary artery lesion without severe superficial calcification; (2) single stent (3.0 mm); (3) high-quality, automated pullback IVUS images at postprocedure. The frequency of NSD and %NSD in these IVUS images were assessed.
Statistical analysis. Data are expressed as number, % or mean ± standard deviation (SD). Differences in continuous data were analyzed by the unpaired t-test. Differences in categorical data were analyzed by chi-sqaure analysis. Statistical significance was defined as p-values < 0.05. The correlation between %NSD and SVI was assessed using linear regression analysis. Statistical analysis was performed with StatView, version 5.0 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina).

Results

Bench-top model. Percent NSD was lower in Bx Velocity stents compared with Express II stents (Figure 2). In the straight model, there was a correlation between %NSD and SVI in Express II stents (Figure 3). In Express II stents, %NSD was higher in the bending model than in the straight model at pressures of 16 and 26 atm (16 atm: 20.8 ± 6.4% vs. 6.9 ± 6.0%; p < 0.05; 26 atm: 24.8 ± 2.0% vs. 15.1 ± 6.6%; p < 0.05).
Human clinical cases. In human cases, there was no significant difference in baseline IVUS measurements including stent length, SVI, maximum stent area and protrusion between the Cypher and Taxus stents (Table 1). NSD segment was observed less in Cypher stents than in Taxus stents (9.4% vs. 61.9%; p < 0.0001). Percent NSD was lower in Cypher stents compared with Taxus stents (Figure 4).

Discussion

There were substantial differences in strut distribution between Bx Velocity and Express II stents. NSD segment was observed less in Bx Velocity stents than in Express II stents. In the bench-test model, NSD segment was observed less in Bx Velocity stents than in Express II stents at the pressures of 16 and 26 atm, confirming previous results from an in vitro study.⁷ This bench test assessed differences in strut distribution between Bx Velocity and Express II stents in not only the circumferential direction, but also the longitudinal direction. Percent NSD was lower in Bx Velocity stents than in Express II stents after higher-pressure expansion. Moreover, in Express II stents, %NSD was greater in the bending model than in the straight model. These data suggest that vessel curvature and stent overexpansion may result in increased NSD segment. In human cases, NSD segment was also observed less in Cypher stents than in Taxus stents, which is concordant with the experimental model.
Stent cell design directly affects the stent strut distribution pattern. Open-cell design, as adopted by the Express II stent, may be more susceptible to NSD, especially when stents are overexpanded or implanted on a tight bend. Uniform strut distribution of the stent is theoretically important to optimize local drug delivery and to suppress intimal hyperplasia following DES implantation.^6,9 More studies to assess the NSD of DES may reveal its impact on intimal hyperplasia after DES implantation.
Study limitations. There are several limitations in this study. First, only 3 mm diameter stents were examined in our analyses. Second, the retrospective nature of an analysis in clinical cases poses a risk for biases. Third, IVUS had a geometrical artifact due to transducer position, which might have affected strut distribution.¹⁰ Finally, the impact of NSD on intimal hyperplasia was not examined.

Conclusion

There was a significant difference in strut distribution between Bx Velocity and Express II stents. Nonuniform strut distribution segment was observed less in Bx Velocity stents than in Express II stents.

References

1. Moses JW, Leon MB, Popma JJ, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. N Engl J Med 2003;349:1315–1323.
2. Colombo A, Drzewiecki J, Banning A, et al. Randomized study to assess the effectiveness of slow- and moderate-release polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary artery lesions. Circulation 2003;108:788–794.
3. Stone GW, Ellis SG, Cox DA, et al. A polymer-based, paclitaxel-eluting stent in patients with coronary artery disease. N Engl J Med 2004;350:221–231.
4. Indolfi C, Pavia M, Angelillo IF. Drug-eluting stents versus bare metal stents in percutaneous coronary interventions (a meta-analysis). Am J Cardiol 2005;95:1146–1152.
5. Lemos PA, Serruys PW, van Domburg RT, et al. Unrestricted utilization of sirolimus-eluting stents compared with conventional bare stent implantation in the “real world”: The Rapamycin-Eluting Stent Evaluated At Rotterdam Cardiology Hospital (RESEARCH) registry. Circulation 2004;109:190–195.
6. Takebayashi H, Mintz GS, Carlier SG, et al. Nonuniform strut distribution correlates with more neointimal hyperplasia after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. Circulation 2004;110:3430–3434.
7. Suzuki Y, Ikeno F, Yeung AC. Drug-eluting stent strut distribution: A comparison between Cypher and Taxus by optical coherence tomography. J Invasive Cardiol 2006;18:111–114.
8. Nakamura M, Yock PG, Bonneau HN, et al. Impact of peri-stent remodeling on restenosis: A volumetric intravascular ultrasound study. Circulation 2001;103:2130–2132.
9. Hwang CW, Wu D, Edelman ER. Physiological transport forces govern drug distribution for stent-based delivery. Circulation 2001;104:600–605.
10. Finet G, Cachard C, Delachartre P, et al. Artifacts in intravascular ultrasound imaging during coronary artery stent implantation. Ultrasound Med Biol 1998;24:793–802.