Still room for improvement: Preclinical and bench testing of a thin‐strut cobalt–chromium bare‐metal stent with passive coating
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a renewed interest in bare-metal stent (BMS) design as degradable polymer coatings are increasingly used as drug-delivery vehicles in drug-eluting stents (DESs), leaving it to the BMS platform to determine the long-term outcome of DES treatment. In this study comprising preclinical and bench tests, we compare two modern thin-strut BMSs of different design. Angiography, morphometry, and histopathology data were acquired in a porcine coronary artery model in a 28-day single-stent study (13 hybrid farm pigs) and in a 90-day overlapping-stent study (8 Yucatan mini-pigs). Standardized bench tests including ion release test were performed to compare mechanical performance of the two stent systems. We found that the optimized stent group induced significantly less neointimal formation and less inflammation than Multi-Link Vision in both (single stent and overlapping stent) porcine studies. The higher efficacy was also associated with a markedly reduced release of cobalt, nickel, chromium, and tungsten ions in physiological solution and better performance in mechanical delivery tests. In conclusion, a further increase in efficacy and better safety profile than the well-known Multi-Link Vision BMS can be achieved by careful optimization of the BMS backbone. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part B: Appl Biomater, 105B: 1612-1621, 2017.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".