Author
Listed:
- Xiaodong Zhu
- Mitsuo Umezu
- Kiyotaka Iwasaki
Abstract
Calcified artery lesions cause stent under-expansion and increase the risk of in-stent restenosis and stent thrombosis. Cutting balloons facilitate the fracturing of calcification prior to stent implantation, although vessel dissection and perforation are potential issues. In clinical practice, calcifications having maximum calcium angles ≤ 180° are rarely fractured during conventional balloon angioplasty. We hypothesize that the lesion/device diameter ratio and the number of blades facing a non-circular calcified lesion may be crucial for fracturing the calcification while avoiding vessel injury. The geometries of the cutting balloons were constructed and their finite-element models were generated by folding and wrapping the balloon model. Numerical simulations were performed for balloons with five different diameters and two types of blade directions in a 180° calcification model. The calcification expansion ability was distinctly higher when two blades faced the calcification than when one blade did. Moreover, when two blades faced the calcification model, larger maximum principal stresses were generated in the calcification even when using undersized balloons with diameters reduced by 0.25 or 0.5 mm from the reference diameter, when compared with the case where one blade faced the calcified model and a balloon of diameter equal to the reference diameter was used. When two blades faced the calcification, smaller stresses were generated in the artery adjacent to the calcification; further, the maximum stress generated in the artery model adjacent to the calcification under the rated pressure of 12 atm when employing undersized balloons was smaller than that when only one blade faced the calcification and when lesion-identical balloon diameters were used under a nominal pressure of 6 atm. Our study suggested that undersized balloons of diameters 0.25 or 0.5 mm less than the reference diameter might be effective in not only expanding the calcified lesion but also reducing the risk of dissection.
Suggested Citation
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0251404. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.