| Literature DB >> 28446750 |
Youngmi Koo1,2, Tarannum Tiasha3, Vesselin N Shanov3, Yeoheung Yun4,5.
Abstract
A bioresorbable metallic helicEntities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28446750 PMCID: PMC5430820 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-01214-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Schematic illustrating the manufacturing steps in the photo-chemical etching approach for making Mg helical stents.
Figure 2Bioreactor configuration for the in vitro and ex vivo simulation of the Mg-based helical stent.
Experimental conditions for in vitro artificial vessel and ex-vivo artery.
| Method | Vessel diameter (mm) | Wall thickness (mm) | Max. Expandable rate (%) | Flow rate (mL/min, when 0.68 Pa) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Static | 3.175 | 1.8 | — | — |
| Dynamic | 3.175 | 1.8 | 0 | 136.3 |
| 3.175 | 1.8 | ~58.8 | 136.3 | |
| 3.969 | 1.6 | ~98.5 | 266.3 | |
| Porcine | 8.5 | 2.5 | ~112.5 | 592.4* |
*Flow rate (mL/min) was operated according to the 0.154 Pa.
Figure 3Geometries and stenting of Mg-based helical stent for vascular bioreactor tests. (a) Optical image of 2D Mg-based ribbon before coiling to form the device, (b) In vitro stent testing: optical image of helical stent for in vitro test (b1), inserted stent in artificial vessel (b2), and expanded stent in vessel (b3), (c) Ex vivo stent testing: optical image of helical stent for ex vivo (c1), optical image of the inserted stent in porcine artery (c2), and expanded stent in artery (c3).
Figure 4Cross-sectional 2D (before test) and 3D (after test) micro-CT structure images revealing corrosion products accumulated during the in vitro static and dynamic fluid flow simulations for 3 days in DMEM (10% FBS, 1% P/S) at 37 °C, 5% CO2. Red dot box images were enlarged. Yellow arrow indicates broken strut after in vitro dynamic fluid flow simulation.
Figure 5SEM images of degraded areas on tested helical stents under flow induced shear stress, 0.68 Pa for 3 days in DMEM (10% FBS, 1% P/S) at 37 °C, 5% CO2. (a–c) Represent the ~58.8% expanded helical stent, (d–f) represent the ~98.5% expanded helical stent. The Table displays the atomic percent (at %) detected in the two positions by EDX.
Figure 63D structure and cross-sectional 2D micro-CT images of expended helical stents in artery revealing the with corrosion products ex vivo dynamic simulation for 3 days in DMEM (10% FBS, 1% P/S) at 37 °C, 5% CO2. (a) Bare stent and extracted stent in artery, (b) 2D sliced image, (c) Enlarged one strut of (b), (d) Interface between implanted helical stent and tissue, (e) Enlarged images at a depth of 1.6 mm in (d,f) sliced images from outmost of artery to lumen (arrow direction in (d)), (g) Actual representative X-ray micro-CT 3D structures of expanded Mg-based helical stent scaffold at the porcine artery. Product: Ca/P complex, H-stent: Mg helical stent, Scale bars on (f): 1 mm.
Figure 7SEM images and EDX analysis of corrosion products surrounding expanded helical stents under the flow induced wall shear stress value of 0.154 Pa for 3 days in DMEM (10% FBS, 1% P/S) at 37 °C, 5% CO2. Indicates Mg-based helical stent has been implanted.
Average degradation rates of Mg-based helical stent under in vitro.
| Static immersion | Dynamic artificial vascular bioreactor* | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expansion rate (%) | 0 | 0 | ~58.8 | ~98.5 |
| Degradation rate (mm/y) | 0.99 ± 0.20 | 2.44 ± 0.45 | 1.62 ± 0.17 | 1.64 ± 0.39 |
*Flow rate (mL/min) was operated according to the wall shear stress of 0.68 Pa.
Comparison of the bioresorbable metallic stents.
| Material | Strut material | Design | Model | Shear stress (Pa) | Testing period (day) | Method | Degradation rate (mm/y) | Literature |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mg-base | AZ31 | Helical Coil |
| 0.154 | 3 | Volume reduction | 0.44 | This article |
| AZ31 | Helical Coil | Immersion (SBF) | — | 3 | Volume reduction | 0.99 | This article | |
| Mg-base | AZ31 | Tubular | Immersion (SBF) | — | 7 | Volume reduction | 0.37 |
|
| Dynamic (SBF) | 0.056 | 7 | Volume reduction | 1.21 | ||||
| Mg-base | AZ31 | Tubular | Immersion (D-Hanks’ solution) | — | 3 | Mass loss | 23~35% mass loss |
|
| Fe-base | Fe35Mn | Prototype | Dynamic (SBF) | 0.6 | Electro chemical | 0.51 |
|