Ultra-hydrophilic stent platforms promote early vascular healing and minimise late tissue response: a potential alternative to second-generation drug-eluting stents.

AIMS: Simple surface modifications can enhance coronary stent performance. Ultra-hydrophilic surface (UHS) treatment of contemporary bare metal stents (BMS) was assessed in vivo to verify whether such stents can provide long-term efficacy comparable to second-generation drug-eluting stents (DES) while promoting healing comparably to BMS. METHODS AND RESULTS: UHS-treated BMS, untreated BMS and corresponding DES were tested for three commercial platforms. A thirty-day and a 90-day porcine coronary model were used to characterise late tissue response. Three-day porcine coronary and seven-day rabbit iliac models were used for early healing assessment. In porcine coronary arteries, hydrophilic treatment reduced intimal hyperplasia relative to the BMS and corresponding DES platforms (1.5-fold to threefold reduction in 30-day angiographic and histological stenosis; p<0.04). Endothelialisation was similar on UHS-treated BMS and untreated BMS, both in swine and rabbit models, and lower on DES. Elevation in thrombotic indices was infrequent (never observed with UHS, rare with BMS, most often with DES), but, when present, correlated with reduced endothelialisation (p<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Ultra-hydrophilic surface treatment of contemporary stents conferred good healing while moderating neointimal and thrombotic responses. Such surfaces may offer safe alternatives to DES, particularly when rapid healing and short dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) are crucial.

Stent thrombogenicity early in high-risk interventional settings is driven by stent design and deployment and protected by polymer-drug coatings.

BACKGROUND: Stent thrombosis is a lethal complication of endovascular intervention. Concern has been raised about the inherent risk associated with specific stent designs and drug-eluting coatings, yet clinical and animal support is equivocal. METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined whether drug-eluting coatings are inherently thrombogenic and if the response to these materials was determined to a greater degree by stent design and deployment with custom-built stents. Drug/polymer coatings uniformly reduce rather than increase thrombogenicity relative to matched bare metal counterparts (0.65-fold; P=0.011). Thick-strutted (162 µm) stents were 1.5-fold more thrombogenic than otherwise identical thin-strutted (81 µm) devices in ex vivo flow loops (P<0.001), commensurate with 1.6-fold greater thrombus coverage 3 days after implantation in porcine coronary arteries (P=0.004). When bare metal stents were deployed in malapposed or overlapping configurations, thrombogenicity increased compared with apposed, length-matched controls (1.58-fold, P=0.001; and 2.32-fold, P<0.001). The thrombogenicity of polymer-coated stents with thin struts was lowest in all configurations and remained insensitive to incomplete deployment. Computational modeling-based predictions of stent-induced flow derangements correlated with spatial distribution of formed clots. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to popular perception, drug/polymer coatings do not inherently increase acute stent clotting; they reduce thrombosis. However, strut dimensions and positioning relative to the vessel wall are critical factors in modulating stent thrombogenicity. Optimal stent geometries and surfaces, as demonstrated with thin stent struts, help reduce the potential for thrombosis despite complex stent configurations and variability in deployment.