Literature DB >> 27913801

The pressure reduction coefficient: A new parameter to assess aneurysmal blood stasis induced by flow diverters/disruptors.

Gregory Gascou1, Riccardo Ferrara2, Dominique Ambard2, Mathieu Sanchez2, Kyriakos Lobotesis3, Franck Jourdan2, Vincent Costalat1.   

Abstract

Background and purpose Pore density (PD), surface metal coverage (SMC) and the number of wires are all different parameters which can influence the efficacy of a flow disruptor/diverter. Nevertheless, the relative importance of a parameter to induce intra-aneurysmal blood stasis is still poorly evaluated. Therefore, comparison between devices based on a unique value is not reliable. The aim of this study was to propose a new bench top parameter (the pressure reduction coefficient (PRC; ξ)) in order to assess the global haemodynamic effect of each flow diverter/disruptor to slow flow. Methods Eight devices were tested in vitro during three different flow conditions. For the eight devices, the PRC was computed at different volumetric flow rates to characterise flow reduction. Comparison was made with SMC, PD and the number of wires. Results The PRC obtained for flow disruptors was on average 1.5 times more efficient in reducing flow compared to flow diverters. PD (mm2) ranged from 24 to 38 for flow diverters and did not independently correlate with the PRC. The SMC of flow diverters ranged from 25% to 70%, and ranged from 20% to 100% for flow disruptors, without independent correlation to the PRC. The number of wires ranged from 48 to 96 for the flow diverters and did not correlate independently to the PRC. Conclusion There were no direct correlations between individual device characteristics and the PRC, suggesting a multifaceted and interrelating association of the overall design of each implant. Hence, the PRC could be used as a simple, reliable parameter to assess the overall capacity of flow disruptors/diverters to induce intra-aneurysmal blood stasis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Flow disruptor; flow diverter; haemodynamic; pore density; surface metal coverage

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27913801      PMCID: PMC5305153          DOI: 10.1177/1591019916673219

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol        ISSN: 1591-0199            Impact factor:   1.610


  32 in total

1.  Flow-diverter silk stent for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: 1-year follow-up in a multicenter study.

Authors:  J Berge; A Biondi; P Machi; H Brunel; L Pierot; J Gabrillargues; K Kadziolka; X Barreau; V Dousset; A Bonafé
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-02-02       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Intra-aneurysmal thrombosis as a possible cause of delayed aneurysm rupture after flow-diversion treatment.

Authors:  Z Kulcsár; E Houdart; A Bonafé; G Parker; J Millar; A J P Goddard; S Renowden; G Gál; B Turowski; K Mitchell; F Gray; M Rodriguez; R van den Berg; A Gruber; H Desal; I Wanke; D A Rüfenacht
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 3.  Inherited thrombophilia: Part 1.

Authors:  D A Lane; P M Mannucci; K A Bauer; R M Bertina; N P Bochkov; V Boulyjenkov; M Chandy; B Dahlbäck; E K Ginter; J P Miletich; F R Rosendaal; U Seligsohn
Journal:  Thromb Haemost       Date:  1996-11       Impact factor: 5.249

4.  Rupture of giant vertebrobasilar aneurysm following flow diversion: mechanical stretch as a potential mechanism for early aneurysm rupture.

Authors:  Benjamin Fox; William Edward Humphries; Vinodh T Doss; Daniel Hoit; Lucas Elijovich; Adam S Arthur
Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg       Date:  2014-10-31       Impact factor: 5.836

Review 5.  Intrasaccular flow-diversion for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: the Woven EndoBridge.

Authors:  Benjamin Mine; Laurent Pierot; Boris Lubicz
Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices       Date:  2014-04-02       Impact factor: 3.166

6.  Treatment of intracranial aneurysms by functional reconstruction of the parent artery: the Budapest experience with the pipeline embolization device.

Authors:  I Szikora; Z Berentei; Z Kulcsar; M Marosfoi; Z S Vajda; W Lee; A Berez; P K Nelson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-02-11       Impact factor: 3.825

7.  Woven Endobridge (WEB) Device for endovascular treatment of ruptured intracranial wide-neck aneurysms: a single-center experience.

Authors:  Jildaz Caroff; Cristian Mihalea; Francesco Dargento; Hiroaki Neki; Léon Ikka; Nidhal Benachour; Jacques Moret; Laurent Spelle
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2014-06-15       Impact factor: 2.804

Review 8.  Reproducibility of haemodynamical simulations in a subject-specific stented aneurysm model--a report on the Virtual Intracranial Stenting Challenge 2007.

Authors:  A G Radaelli; L Augsburger; J R Cebral; M Ohta; D A Rüfenacht; R Balossino; G Benndorf; D R Hose; A Marzo; R Metcalfe; P Mortier; F Mut; P Reymond; L Socci; B Verhegghe; A F Frangi
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2008-06-25       Impact factor: 2.712

9.  Aneurysm rupture after endovascular flow diversion: the possible role of persistent flows through the transition zone associated with device deformation.

Authors:  T E Darsaut; E Rayner-Hartley; A Makoyeva; I Salazkin; F Berthelet; J Raymond
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2013-05-21       Impact factor: 1.610

Review 10.  Efficacy and Safety of the Woven EndoBridge (WEB) Device for the Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  S Asnafi; A Rouchaud; L Pierot; W Brinjikji; M H Murad; D F Kallmes
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2016-08-11       Impact factor: 3.825

View more
  2 in total

1.  In vitro angiographic comparison of the flow-diversion performance of five neurovascular stents.

Authors:  Ronak J Dholakia; Ari D Kappel; Andrew Pagano; Henry H Woo; Baruch B Lieber; David J Fiorella; Chander Sadasivan
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-12-14       Impact factor: 1.610

2.  Hydrodynamic Resistance of Intracranial Flow-Diverter Stents: Measurement Description and Data Evaluation.

Authors:  Benjamin Csippa; Dániel Gyürki; Gábor Závodszky; István Szikora; György Paál
Journal:  Cardiovasc Eng Technol       Date:  2019-12-03       Impact factor: 2.495

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.