<i>In vivo</i> and <i>in vitro</i> characterization of poly(styrene‐<i>b</i>‐isobutylene‐<i>b</i>‐styrene) copolymer stent coatings for biostability, vascular compatibility and mechanical integrity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The TAXUS Express 2 Paclitaxel Eluting Coronary Stent System employs a coating consisting of the thermoplastic elastomer, poly(styrene-b-isobutylene-b-styrene; SIBS), selected for its drug-eluting characteristics, vascular compatibility, mechanical properties, and biostability. This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of different SIBS (17-51 mole % styrene) compositions on mechanical properties, chemical stability, and vascular compatibility. Mechanical property (stress-strain measurements) and stability studies were conducted on polymer films with five different styrene contents (17, 24, 32, 39, and 51 mole %). The ultimate tensile strength did not change significantly with composition, but the elongation at break decreased with increased styrene content. A pulsatile fatigue test further confirmed the mechanical stability of SIBS up to 39 mole % styrene. The vascular compatibility of five different SIBS compositions was assessed using SIBS-only coated stents, in the coronary and carotid arteries in a porcine model study. The stability of the vessel wall, rate/degree of endothelialization, inflammation, and thrombus at timepoints from 30 to 180 days were evaluated. The results confirm vascular compatibility over the range of 17-51 mole % styrene.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".