| Literature DB >> 24470792 |
Hongxia Li1, Yihao Zhang1, Bao Zhu2, Jinying Wu1, Xicheng Wang1.
Abstract
The drug release analysis and optimization for drug-eluting stents in the arterial wall are studied, which involves mechanics, fluid dynamics, and mass transfer processes and design optimization. The Finite Element Method (FEM) is used to analyze the process of drug release in the vessels for drug-eluting stents (DES). Kriging surrogate model is used to build an approximate function relationship between the drug distribution and the coating parameters, replacing the expensive FEM reanalysis of drug release for DES in the optimization process. The diffusion coefficients and the coating thickness are selected as design variables. An adaptive optimization approach based on kriging surrogate model is proposed to optimize the lifetime of the drug in artery wall. The adaptive process is implemented by an infilling sampling criterion named Expected Improvement (EI), which is used to balance local and global search and tends to find the global optimal design. The effect of coating diffusivity and thickness on the drug release process for a typical DES is analyzed by means of FEM. An implementation of the optimization method for the drug release is then discussed. The results demonstrate that the optimized design can efficiently improve the efficacy of drug deposition and penetration into the arterial walls.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2013 PMID: 24470792 PMCID: PMC3891432 DOI: 10.1155/2013/827839
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ScientificWorldJournal ISSN: 1537-744X
Figure 12D simplified model.
Figure 2Drug concentration of the artery wall with different models. (a) Isotropic nonporous medium, (b) isotropic porous media, and (c) anisotropic porous media.
Figure 3Influence of coating diffusivity on drug concentration into the artery wall.
Figure 4Influence of coating thickness on drug concentration into the artery wall.
Samples and responses.
| Samples | Taxus diffusivity (m2/s) | Coating thickness (mm) | Response (s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 4.82∗10−13 | 0.057 | 4238 |
| 2 | 1.07∗10−13 | 0.052 | 3658 |
| 3 | 9.45∗10−13 | 0.073 | 3670 |
| 4 | 8.68∗10−13 | 0.042 | 3416 |
| 5 | 1.53∗10−13 | 0.065 | 2928 |
| 6 | 8.80∗10−13 | 0.031 | 3078 |
| 7 | 3.84∗10−13 | 0.027 | 3940 |
| 8 | 6.55∗10−13 | 0.059 | 4104 |
| 9 | 8.07∗10−13 | 0.072 | 3782 |
| 10 | 7.44∗10−13 | 0.032 | 3112 |
| 11 | 6.84∗10−13 | 0.065 | 3862 |
| 12 | 5.55∗10−13 | 0.046 | 4604 |
| 13 | 2.37∗10−13 | 0.038 | 4862 |
| 14 | 5.87∗10−13 | 0.041 | 3984 |
| 15 | 3.54∗10−13 | 0.062 | 4120 |
Figure 5Iterative optimized process.
Figure 6Influence of coating diffusivity on drug concentration into the artery wall.
Figure 7Influence of coating thickness on drug concentration into the artery wall.