Impact of bioresorbable versus permanent polymer on longterm vessel wall inflammation and healing: a comparative drug-eluting stent experimental study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Drug-eluting stents (DES) have evolved to using bioresorbable polymers as a method of drug delivery. The impact of bioresorbable polymer on long-term neointimal formation, inflammation, and healing has not been fully characterised. This study aimed to evaluate the biological effect of polymer resorption on vascular healing and inflammation. METHODS AND RESULTS: A comparative DES study was performed in the familial hypercholesterolaemic swine model of coronary stenosis. Permanent polymer DES (zotarolimus-eluting [ZES] or everolimus-eluting [EES]) were compared to bioresorbable polymer everolimus-eluting stents (BP-EES) and BMS. Post implantation in 29 swine, stents were explanted and analysed up to 180 days. Area stenosis was reduced in all DES compared to BMS at 30 days. At 180 days, BP-EES had significantly lower area stenosis than EES or ZES. Severe inflammatory activity persisted in permanent polymer DES at 180 days compared to BP-EES or BMS. Qualitative para-strut inflammation areas (graded as none to severe) were elevated but similar in all groups at 30 days, peaked at 90 days in DES compared to BMS (p<0.05) and, at 180 days, were similar between BMS and BP-EES but were significantly greater in DES. CONCLUSIONS: BP-EES resulted in a lower net long-term reduction in neointimal formation and inflammation compared to permanent polymer DES in an animal model. Further study of the long-term neointima formation deserves study in human clinical trials.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".