Detailed observation of arterial healing after stent implantation in swine arteries by using optical coherence tomography.

Osaka city medical journal Pub Date : 2012-06-01
Satoshi Nishimura, Toru Kataoka, Takao Hasegawa, Yoshiki Kobayashi, Koichiro Asawa, Shinji Nakata, Hiroki Nishioka, Shoichi Ehara, Akihisa Hanatani, Kenei Shimada, Takashi Muro, Minoru Yoshiyama
{"title":"Detailed observation of arterial healing after stent implantation in swine arteries by using optical coherence tomography.","authors":"Satoshi Nishimura,&nbsp;Toru Kataoka,&nbsp;Takao Hasegawa,&nbsp;Yoshiki Kobayashi,&nbsp;Koichiro Asawa,&nbsp;Shinji Nakata,&nbsp;Hiroki Nishioka,&nbsp;Shoichi Ehara,&nbsp;Akihisa Hanatani,&nbsp;Kenei Shimada,&nbsp;Takashi Muro,&nbsp;Minoru Yoshiyama","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Histopathological examination is not suitable for sequential in vivo analysis of arterial healing after stenting because it can be performed only after the animals are killed. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) provides higher resolution than intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). The aim of this study was to compare arterial healing images after stenting on the basis of the findings of histopathological examination, IVUS, and OCT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We examined 12 vessels; 12 bare-metal stents were implanted in 6 miniature swine. Histopathological examination, IVUS, and OCT imaging were performed at 1 and 4 weeks after stenting. For quantitative analysis of IVUS and OCT images, we examined cross-sectional frames at 1-mm intervals. For neointimal coverage analysis, the neointimal coverage score was classified into 1 of the 4 categories. A fully covered strut was scored as 3, a partially covered strut was scored as 1 or 2, and an uncovered strut was scored as 0.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In IVUS and OCT analyses, the average neointimal thickness increased between 1 and 4 weeks (p < 0.0001). OCT revealed higher scores at 1 and 4 weeks than IVUS did (at week 1, p < 0.0001; at week 4, p < 0.0001). OCT analysis evaluated the neointimal coverage similarly to histopathological examination.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>On assessment of arterial healing after stenting, we found that the results of the histological examination were more similar to those of the OCT analysis than to those of the IVUS. An OCT imaging device can be used to precisely and sequentially analyze the arterial healing process after stenting.</p>","PeriodicalId":19613,"journal":{"name":"Osaka city medical journal","volume":"58 1","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Osaka city medical journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Histopathological examination is not suitable for sequential in vivo analysis of arterial healing after stenting because it can be performed only after the animals are killed. Optical coherence tomography (OCT) provides higher resolution than intravascular ultrasound (IVUS). The aim of this study was to compare arterial healing images after stenting on the basis of the findings of histopathological examination, IVUS, and OCT.

Methods: We examined 12 vessels; 12 bare-metal stents were implanted in 6 miniature swine. Histopathological examination, IVUS, and OCT imaging were performed at 1 and 4 weeks after stenting. For quantitative analysis of IVUS and OCT images, we examined cross-sectional frames at 1-mm intervals. For neointimal coverage analysis, the neointimal coverage score was classified into 1 of the 4 categories. A fully covered strut was scored as 3, a partially covered strut was scored as 1 or 2, and an uncovered strut was scored as 0.

Results: In IVUS and OCT analyses, the average neointimal thickness increased between 1 and 4 weeks (p < 0.0001). OCT revealed higher scores at 1 and 4 weeks than IVUS did (at week 1, p < 0.0001; at week 4, p < 0.0001). OCT analysis evaluated the neointimal coverage similarly to histopathological examination.

Conclusions: On assessment of arterial healing after stenting, we found that the results of the histological examination were more similar to those of the OCT analysis than to those of the IVUS. An OCT imaging device can be used to precisely and sequentially analyze the arterial healing process after stenting.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
光学相干断层扫描对猪动脉支架植入术后动脉愈合的详细观察。
背景:组织病理学检查不适合用于支架植入术后动脉愈合的连续体内分析,因为它只能在动物被杀死后进行。光学相干断层扫描(OCT)提供比血管内超声(IVUS)更高的分辨率。本研究的目的是在组织病理学检查、IVUS和oct的基础上比较支架植入术后的动脉愈合图像。6只小型猪共植入12个裸金属支架。分别于支架置入后1周和4周进行组织病理学检查、IVUS和OCT成像。为了定量分析IVUS和OCT图像,我们每隔1毫米检查横截面帧。对于新生内膜覆盖率分析,新生内膜覆盖率评分分为4类中的1类。完全覆盖的支柱得分为3,部分覆盖的支柱得分为1或2,未覆盖的支柱得分为0。结果:在IVUS和OCT分析中,平均内膜厚度在1和4周之间增加(p < 0.0001)。OCT在第1周和第4周的评分高于IVUS(第1周,p < 0.0001;第4周,p < 0.0001)。OCT分析评估内膜覆盖范围与组织病理学检查相似。结论:在评估支架植入术后动脉愈合时,我们发现组织学检查的结果与OCT分析的结果更相似,而与IVUS分析的结果更相似。OCT成像设备可用于精确和顺序分析支架植入术后动脉愈合过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Clinical Significance of Perioperative Blood Coagulation Factor XIII in Pulmonary Resections. Comparison of the Clinical Courses of Patients with Influenza after Neuraminidase Inhibitors Treatment: A Postcard Survey of the 2013-2014 Influenza Season in Osaka. Association of the Clinical Subtype and Etiology for Delirium with the Outcome after Risperidone Monotherapy in Patients Having Cancer. Effects of Night Shift Work on Nighttime Blood Pressure among Healthy Young Female Medical Workers. Cardio-ankle Vascular Index Associated with Coronary Plaque Burden not Plaque Morphology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1