Cargando…

(In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data

PURPOSE: Carotid stent (CS) characteristics, such as radial force, scaffolding and flexibility, are continuously modified by stent manufacturers aiming to improve stent performance. Since manufacturers’ definitions and assessment methods are not disclosed, it is unknown how characteristics of differ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Vries, Evelien E., Kök, Mert, Hoving, Astrid M., Slump, Cornelis H., Toorop, Raechel J., de Borst, Gert J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7524852/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32409999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00270-020-02499-1
_version_ 1783588630182232064
author de Vries, Evelien E.
Kök, Mert
Hoving, Astrid M.
Slump, Cornelis H.
Toorop, Raechel J.
de Borst, Gert J.
author_facet de Vries, Evelien E.
Kök, Mert
Hoving, Astrid M.
Slump, Cornelis H.
Toorop, Raechel J.
de Borst, Gert J.
author_sort de Vries, Evelien E.
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Carotid stent (CS) characteristics, such as radial force, scaffolding and flexibility, are continuously modified by stent manufacturers aiming to improve stent performance. Since manufacturers’ definitions and assessment methods are not disclosed, it is unknown how characteristics of different CSs relate to each other or to published literature. We examined in vitro methodological techniques used to measure CS characteristics and assessed comparability between published papers and outcomes as provided by the manufacturers. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases. Studies reporting on in vitro investigations of predefined characteristics of CS used in current everyday clinical practice were included. The predefined characteristics were radial force, scaffolding, flexibility, foreshortening, side-branch preservation and visibility. Eight manufacturers of 10 currently used CS were contacted and data on the predefined device characteristics was requested. RESULTS: 12 published articles were included and six stent manufacturers provided data on six stents (two refused to share data). Used methodologies to measure stent characteristics in published literature and manufacturer data varied greatly for all included characteristics except foreshortening. The number of different units of measurement to express outcomes ranged from two for foreshortening to six for radial force. CONCLUSION: A variety of methodologies and outcome measures is used to quantify CS characteristics, which hampers comparisons between published studies and manufacturer data. Future studies are encouraged to synchronize methodologies and outcome measures. Manufacturers are encouraged up to increase transparency of applied testing methodologies and outcomes. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00270-020-02499-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7524852
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75248522020-10-14 (In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data de Vries, Evelien E. Kök, Mert Hoving, Astrid M. Slump, Cornelis H. Toorop, Raechel J. de Borst, Gert J. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol Review PURPOSE: Carotid stent (CS) characteristics, such as radial force, scaffolding and flexibility, are continuously modified by stent manufacturers aiming to improve stent performance. Since manufacturers’ definitions and assessment methods are not disclosed, it is unknown how characteristics of different CSs relate to each other or to published literature. We examined in vitro methodological techniques used to measure CS characteristics and assessed comparability between published papers and outcomes as provided by the manufacturers. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus databases. Studies reporting on in vitro investigations of predefined characteristics of CS used in current everyday clinical practice were included. The predefined characteristics were radial force, scaffolding, flexibility, foreshortening, side-branch preservation and visibility. Eight manufacturers of 10 currently used CS were contacted and data on the predefined device characteristics was requested. RESULTS: 12 published articles were included and six stent manufacturers provided data on six stents (two refused to share data). Used methodologies to measure stent characteristics in published literature and manufacturer data varied greatly for all included characteristics except foreshortening. The number of different units of measurement to express outcomes ranged from two for foreshortening to six for radial force. CONCLUSION: A variety of methodologies and outcome measures is used to quantify CS characteristics, which hampers comparisons between published studies and manufacturer data. Future studies are encouraged to synchronize methodologies and outcome measures. Manufacturers are encouraged up to increase transparency of applied testing methodologies and outcomes. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00270-020-02499-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2020-05-14 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7524852/ /pubmed/32409999 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00270-020-02499-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Review
de Vries, Evelien E.
Kök, Mert
Hoving, Astrid M.
Slump, Cornelis H.
Toorop, Raechel J.
de Borst, Gert J.
(In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data
title (In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data
title_full (In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data
title_fullStr (In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data
title_full_unstemmed (In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data
title_short (In)comparability of Carotid Artery Stent Characteristics: A Systematic Review on Assessment and Comparison with Manufacturer Data
title_sort (in)comparability of carotid artery stent characteristics: a systematic review on assessment and comparison with manufacturer data
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7524852/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32409999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00270-020-02499-1
work_keys_str_mv AT devrieseveliene incomparabilityofcarotidarterystentcharacteristicsasystematicreviewonassessmentandcomparisonwithmanufacturerdata
AT kokmert incomparabilityofcarotidarterystentcharacteristicsasystematicreviewonassessmentandcomparisonwithmanufacturerdata
AT hovingastridm incomparabilityofcarotidarterystentcharacteristicsasystematicreviewonassessmentandcomparisonwithmanufacturerdata
AT slumpcornelish incomparabilityofcarotidarterystentcharacteristicsasystematicreviewonassessmentandcomparisonwithmanufacturerdata
AT tooropraechelj incomparabilityofcarotidarterystentcharacteristicsasystematicreviewonassessmentandcomparisonwithmanufacturerdata
AT deborstgertj incomparabilityofcarotidarterystentcharacteristicsasystematicreviewonassessmentandcomparisonwithmanufacturerdata