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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Starke, Robert M, Thompson, John, Pagani, Ariana, Choubey, Animesh, Wainwright, John M, Wolf, Michael F, Jahanbekam, Reza, Girdhar, Gaurav
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