Effects of metal coverage rate of flow diversion device on neointimal growth at side branch ostium and stented artery: an animal experiment in rabbit abdominal aorta

Abstract

The actual MCR exhibited remarkable differences once FD was implanted in vivo. Significantly more intimal coverage at the side branch ostia could be induced when MCR was ≥40%. The neointimal thickness within the stent was positively correlated to device MCR.

Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery Patency after Flow-Diverting Stent Treatment

“…The higher radius of curvature at the origin of the ophthalmic artery would be expected to increase, rather than reduce, stent porosity 16 compared with the relatively straight vertebral artery segment from which the PICA originates. Animal studies indicate a minimal but increased incidence of branch occlusion with lower stent porosity, 20 such as what might be found after FDS implantation across the PICA ostium and with multiple overlapping stents. 21 However, our study and others did not find an association between the number of devices and branch occlusion.…”

A Novel Flow-Diverting Device (Tubridge) for the Treatment of 28 Large or Giant Intracranial Aneurysms: A Single-Center Experience

“…After demonstrating its efficacy and safety in animal experiments, 7,8 we obtained the consent of the Ethics Committee and China Food and Drug Administration to initiate the present prospective clinical trial, aimed at evaluating its feasibility, safety, and efficacy for the treatment of large or giant internal carotid artery aneurysms.…”

Treatment of Ruptured Vertebral Artery Dissecting Aneurysms Distal to the Posterior Inferior Cerebellar Artery: Stenting or Trapping?

“…In contrast, when the VADAs close to the PICA are treated using SAC, the only difference may be the increased potential to cover the origin of the PICA by the stent struts, which has proven to be safe in most cases [28,29]. In our stenting group, the orifice of the PICA was covered in 15 cases by 1 to 3 (overlapping) stent(s), and there were no perforator-related ischemic complications.…”