Author | Stent | Animal model | Coating | Control | Neointimal thickness | Duration (weeks) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Coated | Control | ||||||||||||
– | divYsio | Porcine coronary, matched | PC | Bare stent Bare stent | 0.14 (0.09)5-153
0.10 (0.08)5-153 | 0.15 (0.13)5-153
0.09 (0.07)5-153 | 4 12 | ||||||
Kuiper21 | Palmaz-Schatz | Rabbit iliac, porcine coronary, matched | PC | Bare stent | 0.20 (0.05) 0.44 (0.27) | 0.23 (0.11) 0.47 (0.38) | 4 4 | ||||||
van der Giessen9 | Wiktor | Porcine coronary, matched | PGLA PEO | Bare stent Bare stent | 0.46 (0.18) 2.36 (0.60) | 0.08 (0.03) 0.38 (0.17) | 4 4 | ||||||
Hardhammer17 | Palmaz-Schatz | Porcine coronary, matched | Heparin | Bare stent Bare stent | 0.26 (0.10) 0.15 (0.06) | 0.11 (0.04) 0.20 (0.05) | 4 12 | ||||||
van der Giessen26 | Wallstent | Porcine coronary, matched | Biogold | Bare stent | 0.11 (0.04–0.17)5-151 | 0.10 (0.07–0.19)5-151 | 12 | ||||||
de Scheerder27 | Not described | Porcine coronary, oversized injury model | POP/MPD | POP stent | 0.99 (0.28) | 1.74 (0.84) | 6 | ||||||
Cox28 | Cook | Porcine coronary, oversized injury model | CEL/HEP/MET | Bare stent | – | – | 4 | ||||||
Lincoff23 | Wiktor | Porcine coronary, oversized injury model | HMWPLLA/DEX | PLLA stent Bare stent | 0.79 (0.44)5-152 | 0.81 (0.23)5-152
0.88 (0.31)5-152 | 4 | ||||||
Aggarwal34 | Cook | Rabbit iliac, balloon injury model | CEL/GPIIb/IIIa | CEL ± anti CMV | 0.12 (0.04) | 0.11 (0.07) | 4 |
PC, phosphorylcholine; PGLA, polyglycolic/lactic acid; PEO, polyethyleneoxide; POP/MPD, polyorganophosphazene/methylpredisnolone; CEL/HEP/MET, cellulose/heparin/methotrexate; HMWPLLA/DEX, high molecular weight poly-L lactic acid/dexamethasone; CMV, cytomegalovirus.
5-150 Representative values for the best and worst performing polymers are given;
↵5-151 range;
↵5-152 values calculated from fig 6 in Lincoffet al 23;
↵5-153 for comparative purposes, the thickness of the wire struts have been deducted from the data.