| Literature DB >> 23098083 |
Feng Yang1, Shi-Chao Feng, Xiang-Jun Pang, Wei-Xiao Li, Yong-Hua Bi, Qian Zhao, Shi-Xuan Zhang, Yang Wang, Bo Feng.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Circulating endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) capture technology improves endothelialization rates of sirolimus-eluting stents (SES), but the problem of delayed re-endothelialization, as well as endothelial dysfunction, has still not been overcome. Therefore, we investigated whether the combination coating of hyaluronan-chitosan (HC) and anti-CD34 antibody applied on an SES (HCASES) can promote endothelialization, while reducing neointimal formation and inflammation.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23098083 PMCID: PMC3506512 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2261-12-96
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Cardiovasc Disord ISSN: 1471-2261 Impact factor: 2.298
Figure 1After implanting CD34 coated stents in swine vessel, EPCs in the peripheral blood can be quickly and specificity captured by CD34 monoclonal antibody on the stent surface,differentiated into vascular endothelial cells by fluorescence immunohistochemistry. 48 hours later,about 85% of stent surface was covered with monolayer vascular endothelial cells by SEM.
Quantitative Scanning Electron Microscopy:Percentage Endothelium Covering The Stent Struts at 7 Days, 14 Days and 28 Days
| | | | | |
| Above struts | 83±5%§ | 31±4%* | 68±7%§* | 0.027 |
| Between | 90±2% | 74±8%* | 85±5%* | 0.044 |
| | | | | |
| Above struts | 95±2% | 51±6% | 87±4% | 0.022 |
| Between | 98±2% | 89±4%* | 95±3%* | 0.031 |
| | | | | |
| Above struts | 97±3% | 74±8%* | 95±4%* | 0.042 |
| Between | 100±0% | 94±2% | 100±0% | 0.079 |
§P<0.05 for GS vs HCASES.
¶P<0.05 for GS vs SES.
*P<0.05 for SES vs HCASES.
Figure 2Representative SEM images of the three types of stents at 1-week and 2-week follow-ups. SEM (magnification×200) at 7 days showed the greatest endothelialization rates in the GS group ( GS-7days ), and there was also a significant increase in endothelial strut coverage in the HCASES group ( HCASES-7 days) compared with the SES group (SES-7 days). At 14 days, Low-magnification SEM images (50×) showed thin endothelial coverage on the stent struts of the three different types , and regions of interest were photographed at further magnifications of 500× for direct visualization of ECs.
Figure 3Representative lower-power SEM images of 15× and 35× for the whole face of the HCASES at 14 days.
Histomorphometric and Histopathologic Finding at 14 Days and 28 Days Following Implantation of GS, SES, or HCASES in Porcine Coronary Arteries
| | | | | |
| Injury score | 0.77±0.24 | 0.84±0.19 | 0.92±0.26 | 0.436 |
| Inflammation score | 1.64±0.38§ | 1.01±0.21 | 0.81±0.29§ | 0.482 |
| IEL area(mm2) | 4.11±0.46 | 3.93±0.82 | 3.99±0.36 | 0.085 |
| Lumen area (mm2) | 2.76±0.43 | 2.99±0.53 | 2.84±0.33 | 0.091 |
| Intimal area(mm2) | 1.82±0.94 | 1.34±0.49 | 1.58±0.66 | 0.058 |
| Neointimal thickness(μm) | 145.39±72.57 | 112.72±38.52 | 136.17±51.94 | 0.072 |
| Percent of stenosis (%) | 17.88±8.24 | 13.94±5.21 | 15.68±7.03 | 0.066 |
| | | | | |
| IEL area(mm2) | 4.76±0.84 | 4.36±0.53 | 4.49±0.46 | 0.658 |
| Lumen area (mm2) | 1.96±0.47§ | 2.78±0.36 | 2.55±0.62§ | 0.037 |
| Intimal area(mm2) | 2.80±0.37§ | 1.58±0.17 | 1.94±0.84§ | 0.024 |
| Neointimal thickness(μm) | 276.25±108.36§ | 131.44±43.85 | 184.53±87.29§ | 0.022 |
| Percent of stenosis (%) | 33.74±11.85§ | 16.48±7.31 | 20.51±9.43§ | 0.031 |
| Injury score | 0.81±0.14 | 0.79±0.24 | 0.82±0.16 | 0.462 |
| Inflammation score | 1.69±0.33§ | 1.21±0.72 | 1.07±0.56§ | 0.447 |
Data are mean±SD. IEL, internal elastic lamina.
P<0.05 for SES vs HCASES.
§P<0.05 for GS vs HCASES.
¶P<0.05 for GS vs SES.
GS = anti-CD34 antibody stent; SES= sirolimus-eluting stent.
HCASES = HC-anti-CD34 antibody combined with a sirolimus-eluting stent.
Figure 4Representative low-power photomicrographs (magnification×4) and high-power photomicrographs (magnification ×10) at 28 days after implantation of GS, SES and HCASES in porcine coronary arteries. The HCASES group showed less stenosis than that in the GS group,and there was no significant difference compared with the SES group . Of note , stent struts( shown in GS1 and SES1) may be deformed by excessive strength when the dissected vessel is cut transversely into two equal parts.