Fenestrated Stent-Graft Repair: Which Stent Should Be Used to Secure Target Vessel Fenestrations?

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid

Abstract

Purpose:

To investigate in an in vitro model the ability of different covered and uncovered stents to resist displacement/migration of a fenestrated stent-graft.

Methods:

Three different types (2 covered, 1 bare) of commonly used 7-mm balloonexpandable stainless steel stents (Jostent, Advanta V12, and Palmaz Genesis) were investigated in a testing rig consisting of 2 overlapping tubes with 2 sets of 7-mm holes representing bilateral renal artery fenestrations and ostia. The rig was attached to a tensile tester via pneumatic clamps. The stents were deployed without flaring to 7 mm through the overlapping holes. The rig was moved apart at a constant rate of 12 mm/min up to a maximum displacement of 6 mm; force versus displacement values were recorded while stent deformation was observed. Tests were repeated at least 6 times for each stent type at room temperature. The median force required to cause a 25%, 50%, or 75% reduction in cross-sectional area of the bilateral “renal artery” stents was determined.

Results:

The median force (interquartile range) required to cause a 50% reduction in crosssectional area of identical bilateral “renal artery” stents securing fenestrations was 25.1 N (8.1) for a covered Jostent, 9.3 N (0.9) for a covered Advanta V12 stent, and 7.5 N (0.7) for a bare Palmaz Genesis stent. The differences were statistically significant (p<0.01) between stents at each of the 3 levels of cross-sectional area reduction.

Conclusion:

There is a significant difference in the ability of different commercial “nondedicated” stents to withstand a crushing force when deployed within endograft fenestrations, which has important implications for clinical practice.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles