We carried out a prospective evaluation of a new vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) phosphorylation assay in order to detect patients with high-risk coronary subacute stent thrombosis (SAT) despite thienopyridine regimen. Twenty healthy donors (group 1) without any medication were compared to 16 stented patients (group 2) treated by ticlopidin or clopidogrel initiated 2 days before stenting and aspirin (250 mg/day). No difference in platelet reactivity was noted between group 1 and group 2 treated only with aspirin (72.00% +/- 4.17% vs. 69.73% +/- 5.62%, respectively; P = NS). Significant differences were found between patients of group 2 treated with aspirin alone (69.73% +/- 5.62%), after 2.0 days (60.14% +/- 9.60%; P < 0.05), and after 4.8 +/- 1.3 days (48.37% +/- 11.19%; P < 0.05) with thienopyridine-aspirin. Among 1,684 consecutive stented patients, 16 patients who presented an SAT (group 3) were compared with 30 other stented patients free of SAT (group 4). We found a significant difference between group 3 (63.28% +/- 9.56%) and group 4 (39.80% +/- 10.9%; P < 0.0001). VASP phosphorylation analysis may be useful for the detection of coronary SAT.

Stenting of unprotected LMCA stenosis provided excellent immediate results, particularly in good CABG candidates. Medium-term results were good, with a restenosis rate of 23%, similar to that seen after stenting at other coronary sites. Stenting deserves to be considered a safe and effective alternative to CABG in institutions performing large numbers of PTCAs.

Treatment of "below-the-knee" lesions with SES may provide an alternative treatment for patients with CLI.

High radial force has become an essential feature of new coronary stents. These stents are expected to exhibit sufficient radial force and minimum radial recoil when deployed in atheromatous lesions of various morphologies. The aim of this study was to compare the radial force of 17 coronary stents in vitro (Anglodynamics, ACS Multilink, AVE Micro II and GFX, Bard XT, Biocompatibles PC, Cook GR II, Cordis Crossflex, Hexacath Freedom, Johnson & Johnson PS 153'PS 154, and Crown, Medtronic Wiktor and BeStent BEL‐15, Saint‐Côme SC 1616, Scimed Nir 7 and 9). Two in vitro mechanical tests were performed to assess the stent radial force. The first test measured the deformation of coronary stents in a V‐stand by using a deformation controlled by a dynamometer based on a longitudinal generatrix. The precision was of 1 micron. This comparative test highlighted the appreciable variation in behavior of the range of tested stents in terms of resistance to local compression. The line graphs obtained show a very small (and in some cases nonexistent) purely elastic behavior area in the stents, with this result reflecting a small (<0.4 Newtons) range of forces applied to all stents. Above this value, the stents did not return to their size before compression and the line graph remains approximately linear for a long period. It was therefore possible to distinguish between two families of stents on the basis of the presence or absence of this elastic area. In the second test, the stent was deployed in a 3.0‐mm elastic tube and a pressure gradient created between the interior and exterior of the tube. The precision was of 50 microns. A typical line graph of the pressure‐diameter relationship was recognizable for a given stent. No difference in behavior between the different coronary stents was noted up to 0.3 × 105 Pa; subsequently, after 0.3 × 105 Pa, sizable deformation differences were visible between the least resistant stent, the BeStent BEL‐15, and the most resistant stent, the Crossflex. Cathet. Cardiovasc. Intervent. 46:380–391, 1999. © 1999 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

The efficacy and safety of coronary stent implantation depend on the mechanical features of these devices when deployed in atheromatous lesions of various morphologies. We evaluated the trackability, flexibility, and conformability of 17 coronary stents using specific mechanical bench tests. The quantifications used a dynamometer for assessment of trackability (maximal strength) and flexibility (stiffness) and a 3D optical gauging machine for assessment of conformability (distance between stent and arterial wall in a curvature). The maximal strength (measuring the trackability) ranged respectively from 0.24 +/- 0.06 and 0.38 +/- 0.03 N (Seaquest) to 1.31 +/- 0.42 and 1.34 +/- 0.35 N (Carbostent), concerning respectively curvatures of 90 degrees (P < 0.0001) and 135 degrees (P < 0.0001). The stiffness (measuring the flexibility) ranged from 0.53 +/- 0.16 (Seaquest) to 1.28 +/- 0.10 N/mm (NIR Royal; P < 0.0001). The mean distance between stent and external curvature (external conformability) ranged from 0.15 +/- 0.06 mm (S7) to 0.57 +/- 0.4 mm (NIR Royal; P < 0.0001). The mean distance between stent and internal curve (internal conformability) ranged from 0.26 +/- 0.13 (S7) to 0.44 +/- 0.12 mm (S670; P < 0.0001). These results may influence the choice of a particular stent adapted to a specific coronary anatomy.