Literature DB >> 34432207

Verification of the differences of scoring effect in current scoring balloons.

Yoshihisa Kinoshita1, Kiyotaka Iwasaki2,3, Takahiko Suzuki4.   

Abstract

The characteristics of each scoring balloon seem to be different because material or configuration of scoring element in each device is unique. The aim of this study is to clarify the difference of scoring effect among 3 different scoring devices. We prepared 3 different scoring devices [Wolverine™ Cutting Balloon™ (CB), ScoreFlex™ NC (SF), NSE Alpha™ (NSE), n = 5 respectively. Balloon diameter is 3 mm and 2 types of silicone tubes with different elasticity [140 kPa (tube S) and 576 kPa (tube H), respectively. Inner diameter is 3 mm]. We dilated each balloon in each silicone tube with nominal pressure (NP) and 20 atmosphere (HP) and took a picture using a micro CT. We measured penetration depth of all scoring elements into silicone tube wall and calculated their percentage using the following formula; penetration depth/original scoring element height × 100. We also observed the deformation of scoring element during balloon inflation in each device. Scoring element of CB cut deeper into both tubes significantly than SF and NSE at both pressure (40.5% vs 25.1% and 16.8% at NP and 86.1% vs 33.5% and 29.1% at HP in tube S, p < 0.01, respectively, 62.6% vs 33.5% and 17.0% at NP and 93.3% vs 45.1% and 36.5% at HP in tube H, p < 0.01, respectively). Although no deformation of scoring element was recognized in CB, some deformations were observed in 50% of NSE and 40% of SF (p = 0.0377). Scoring balloon with sharp and firmly fixed scoring elements like CB may show definite scoring effect.
© 2021. Japanese Association of Cardiovascular Intervention and Therapeutics.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bench test; Scoring balloon; Scoring effect

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34432207     DOI: 10.1007/s12928-021-00807-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiovasc Interv Ther        ISSN: 1868-4297


  5 in total

1.  Efficacy of lacrosse NSE using the "leopard-crawl" technique on severely calcified lesions.

Authors:  Kazuhiro Ashida; Taichiro Hayase; Takayuki Shinmura
Journal:  J Invasive Cardiol       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 2.022

2.  Wire Bias, Insufficient Differential Sanding, and Orbital Atherectomy-Induced Coronary Pseudoaneurysm.

Authors:  Takahiro Hayashi; Yutaka Tanaka; Koki Shishido; Shohei Yokota; Noriaki Moriyama; Kazuki Tobita; Futoshi Yamanaka; Shingo Mizuno; Saeko Takahashi; Shigeru Saito
Journal:  Circ Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2018-10       Impact factor: 6.546

3.  Rotational atherectomy for fibro-calcific coronary artery disease in drug eluting stent era: procedural outcomes and angiographic follow-up results.

Authors:  Sudhir Rathore; Hitoshi Matsuo; Mitsuyasu Terashima; Yoshihisa Kinoshita; Masashi Kimura; Etsuo Tsuchikane; Kenya Nasu; Mariko Ehara; Yasushi Asakura; Osamu Katoh; Takahiko Suzuki
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2010-05-01       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Is there a role for endovascular stent implantation in the management of postoperative right ventricular outflow tract obstruction in the era of transcatheter valve implantation?

Authors:  Sok-Leng Kang; Ronand Ramroop; Larissa Manojlovich; Kyle Runeckles; Steve Fan; Rajiv R Chaturvedi; Kyong-Jin Lee; Lee N Benson
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2021-12-30       Impact factor: 2.692

5.  Outcomes of rotational atherectomy versus orbital atherectomy for the treatment of heavily calcified coronary stenosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Abdul Ahad Khan; Ghulam Murtaza; Muhammad Faisal Khalid; Christopher J White; Mamas A Mamas; Debabrata Mukherjee; Hani Jneid; Madhan Shanmugasundaram; Harsha S Nagarajarao; Timir K Paul
Journal:  Catheter Cardiovasc Interv       Date:  2020-12-16       Impact factor: 2.692

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.