Cargando…
Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology
BACKGROUND: The Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology is a next generation flow diverter developed to improve aneurysm occlusion and implant endothelialization in addition to lowering thrombogenicity. We report here the in vivo biocompatibility and in vitro hemocompatibility pe...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7509525/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32487767 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016043 |
_version_ | 1783585615120433152 |
---|---|
author | Starke, Robert M Thompson, John Pagani, Ariana Choubey, Animesh Wainwright, John M Wolf, Michael F Jahanbekam, Reza Girdhar, Gaurav |
author_facet | Starke, Robert M Thompson, John Pagani, Ariana Choubey, Animesh Wainwright, John M Wolf, Michael F Jahanbekam, Reza Girdhar, Gaurav |
author_sort | Starke, Robert M |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology is a next generation flow diverter developed to improve aneurysm occlusion and implant endothelialization in addition to lowering thrombogenicity. We report here the in vivo biocompatibility and in vitro hemocompatibility performance of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology (Vantage) compared with the Pipeline Flex Embolization Device (Flex). METHODS: Biocompatibility (via histology), aneurysm occlusion and vessel patency (via angiography), and endothelial coverage (via scanning electron microscopy (SEM)) for the Vantage and Flex devices were assessed in the rabbit elastase aneurysm model at 90 days (n=29) and 180 days (n=27). In vitro thrombogenicity for Flex and Vantage (n=16) was assessed using a human blood flow loop model at low heparin concentration (0.6 U/mL) with thrombin generation, platelet activation and thrombus visualization as outputs. RESULTS: Raymond Roy Occlusion Classification grade 1 was higher for Vantage (61%) compared with Flex (46%), but was not statistically significant (p>0.05). All branch vessels were patent. Histological measures for both devices were similar (p>0.05). Endothelial coverage of the implant was significantly better for Vantage compared with Flex (p<0.05). In vitro measurements of thrombin generation (thrombin-antithrombin complex (µg/mL): Vantage 0.49±0.45; Flex 10.57±9.84) and platelet activation (β-thromboglobulin (IU/µl): Vantage 0.41±0.19; Flex 4.14±2.38) were both statistically lower (p<0.05) for Vantage compared with Flex. High resolution microscopy showed less accumulation of thrombus on Vantage as compared with Flex. CONCLUSION: Vantage improved aneurysm occlusion and implant endothelialization and had significantly lower thrombogenicity as compared with Flex, while preserving the biocompatibility safety profile of Flex. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7509525 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75095252020-10-05 Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology Starke, Robert M Thompson, John Pagani, Ariana Choubey, Animesh Wainwright, John M Wolf, Michael F Jahanbekam, Reza Girdhar, Gaurav J Neurointerv Surg New Devices and Techniques BACKGROUND: The Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology is a next generation flow diverter developed to improve aneurysm occlusion and implant endothelialization in addition to lowering thrombogenicity. We report here the in vivo biocompatibility and in vitro hemocompatibility performance of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology (Vantage) compared with the Pipeline Flex Embolization Device (Flex). METHODS: Biocompatibility (via histology), aneurysm occlusion and vessel patency (via angiography), and endothelial coverage (via scanning electron microscopy (SEM)) for the Vantage and Flex devices were assessed in the rabbit elastase aneurysm model at 90 days (n=29) and 180 days (n=27). In vitro thrombogenicity for Flex and Vantage (n=16) was assessed using a human blood flow loop model at low heparin concentration (0.6 U/mL) with thrombin generation, platelet activation and thrombus visualization as outputs. RESULTS: Raymond Roy Occlusion Classification grade 1 was higher for Vantage (61%) compared with Flex (46%), but was not statistically significant (p>0.05). All branch vessels were patent. Histological measures for both devices were similar (p>0.05). Endothelial coverage of the implant was significantly better for Vantage compared with Flex (p<0.05). In vitro measurements of thrombin generation (thrombin-antithrombin complex (µg/mL): Vantage 0.49±0.45; Flex 10.57±9.84) and platelet activation (β-thromboglobulin (IU/µl): Vantage 0.41±0.19; Flex 4.14±2.38) were both statistically lower (p<0.05) for Vantage compared with Flex. High resolution microscopy showed less accumulation of thrombus on Vantage as compared with Flex. CONCLUSION: Vantage improved aneurysm occlusion and implant endothelialization and had significantly lower thrombogenicity as compared with Flex, while preserving the biocompatibility safety profile of Flex. BMJ Publishing Group 2020-10 2020-06-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7509525/ /pubmed/32487767 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016043 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | New Devices and Techniques Starke, Robert M Thompson, John Pagani, Ariana Choubey, Animesh Wainwright, John M Wolf, Michael F Jahanbekam, Reza Girdhar, Gaurav Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology |
title | Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology |
title_full | Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology |
title_fullStr | Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology |
title_full_unstemmed | Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology |
title_short | Preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the Pipeline Vantage Embolization Device with Shield Technology |
title_sort | preclinical safety and efficacy evaluation of the pipeline vantage embolization device with shield technology |
topic | New Devices and Techniques |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7509525/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32487767 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2020-016043 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT starkerobertm preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology AT thompsonjohn preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology AT paganiariana preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology AT choubeyanimesh preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology AT wainwrightjohnm preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology AT wolfmichaelf preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology AT jahanbekamreza preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology AT girdhargaurav preclinicalsafetyandefficacyevaluationofthepipelinevantageembolizationdevicewithshieldtechnology |