Stent effects on duplex velocity estimates

Abstract Background Doppler-derived velocity criteria used to define the presence and severity of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous angioplasty and endoluminal stenting have been called into question. This study uses an in vitro flow model to examine Doppler-derived velocities after placement o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Journal of surgical research 2013-07, Vol.183 (1), p.457-461
Hauptverfasser: Kuppler, Christopher S., MD, Christie, Jason W., MD, Newton, William B., MD, Ghanami, Racheed J., MD, Craven, Timothy E., MSPH, Berry, Joel L., PhD, Hansen, Kimberley J., MD
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 461
container_issue 1
container_start_page 457
container_title The Journal of surgical research
container_volume 183
creator Kuppler, Christopher S., MD
Christie, Jason W., MD
Newton, William B., MD
Ghanami, Racheed J., MD
Craven, Timothy E., MSPH
Berry, Joel L., PhD
Hansen, Kimberley J., MD
description Abstract Background Doppler-derived velocity criteria used to define the presence and severity of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous angioplasty and endoluminal stenting have been called into question. This study uses an in vitro flow model to examine Doppler-derived velocities after placement of balloon-expandable and self-expanding endoluminal stents (BES and SES). Methods An in vitro vascular circuit model consisting of a pulsatile pump, tubing, and a conduit was created. The pump was programmed to replicate the Doppler spectral waveform pattern of the renal and carotid arteries. Peak systolic velocity (PSV) and end diastolic velocity (EDV) were estimated at five distinct conduit locations. Three replicate velocity measurements were made at each location. After initial velocity estimates, a BES or an SES was deployed within the conduit. Results Mean ± standard error PSV was 95.8 ± 2.6 cm/s, 97.0 ± 2.7 cm/s, and 101.4 ± 2.7 cm/s for unstented, BES and SES, respectively. PSV estimates were increased between unstented and stented conduits when SESs were present. The increase in mean systolic velocity of 6.4% observed with SES was statistically significant ( P < 0.05). EDV values did not differ significantly across conditions. Mean ± standard error EDV was 36.2 ± 1.0 cm/s, 37.3 ± 1.1 cm/s, and 37.2 ± 1.1 cm/s for unstented, BES, and SES, respectively. Conclusion The presence of an SES was associated with a less than 7% change in estimated PSV. These results suggest that Doppler velocity estimates for renal and carotid arteries are not materially affected by either BES or SES.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jss.2012.03.004
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1369234907</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022480412001655</els_id><sourcerecordid>1369234907</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-d37b3824262db7cffdd7dc5b6cc09af1c03ce840d8b85dfd83dd9f0465ed4b1e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kV1LwzAUhoMoOqc_wBvppQitJx9tUwRBhl8w8GJ6HdrkBFK7djbtcP_ejE0vvPAqBN7nTc5zCLmgkFCg2U2d1N4nDChLgCcA4oBMKBRpLLOcH5IJAGOxkCBOyKn3NYR7kfNjcsJ4FviMT8j1YsB2iNBa1IOPujYy46rBr2iNTafdsInQD25ZDujPyJEtG4_n-3NK3h8f3mbP8fz16WV2P4-1ADnEhucVl0ywjJkq19YakxudVpnWUJSWauAapQAjK5kaayQ3prAgshSNqCjyKbna9a767nMMz6ul8xqbpmyxG72iPCsYFwXkIUp3Ud133vdo1aoPn-03ioLaKlK1CorUVpECroKiwFzu68dqieaX-HESAre7AIYh1w575bXDVqNxfZCkTOf-rb_7Q-vGtU6XzQdu0Nfd2LfBnqLKB0YttjvarogyCIVpyr8BZHaLhA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1369234907</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Stent effects on duplex velocity estimates</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Kuppler, Christopher S., MD ; Christie, Jason W., MD ; Newton, William B., MD ; Ghanami, Racheed J., MD ; Craven, Timothy E., MSPH ; Berry, Joel L., PhD ; Hansen, Kimberley J., MD</creator><creatorcontrib>Kuppler, Christopher S., MD ; Christie, Jason W., MD ; Newton, William B., MD ; Ghanami, Racheed J., MD ; Craven, Timothy E., MSPH ; Berry, Joel L., PhD ; Hansen, Kimberley J., MD</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background Doppler-derived velocity criteria used to define the presence and severity of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous angioplasty and endoluminal stenting have been called into question. This study uses an in vitro flow model to examine Doppler-derived velocities after placement of balloon-expandable and self-expanding endoluminal stents (BES and SES). Methods An in vitro vascular circuit model consisting of a pulsatile pump, tubing, and a conduit was created. The pump was programmed to replicate the Doppler spectral waveform pattern of the renal and carotid arteries. Peak systolic velocity (PSV) and end diastolic velocity (EDV) were estimated at five distinct conduit locations. Three replicate velocity measurements were made at each location. After initial velocity estimates, a BES or an SES was deployed within the conduit. Results Mean ± standard error PSV was 95.8 ± 2.6 cm/s, 97.0 ± 2.7 cm/s, and 101.4 ± 2.7 cm/s for unstented, BES and SES, respectively. PSV estimates were increased between unstented and stented conduits when SESs were present. The increase in mean systolic velocity of 6.4% observed with SES was statistically significant ( P &lt; 0.05). EDV values did not differ significantly across conditions. Mean ± standard error EDV was 36.2 ± 1.0 cm/s, 37.3 ± 1.1 cm/s, and 37.2 ± 1.1 cm/s for unstented, BES, and SES, respectively. Conclusion The presence of an SES was associated with a less than 7% change in estimated PSV. These results suggest that Doppler velocity estimates for renal and carotid arteries are not materially affected by either BES or SES.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-4804</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8673</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2012.03.004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 23601663</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Blood Flow Velocity ; Intraluminal stent effects ; Laser-Doppler Flowmetry ; Stenting ; Stents ; Surgery ; Velocity criteria ; Velocity estimates</subject><ispartof>The Journal of surgical research, 2013-07, Vol.183 (1), p.457-461</ispartof><rights>2013</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013. Published by Elsevier Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-d37b3824262db7cffdd7dc5b6cc09af1c03ce840d8b85dfd83dd9f0465ed4b1e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-d37b3824262db7cffdd7dc5b6cc09af1c03ce840d8b85dfd83dd9f0465ed4b1e3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022480412001655$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23601663$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kuppler, Christopher S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christie, Jason W., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newton, William B., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghanami, Racheed J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craven, Timothy E., MSPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berry, Joel L., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hansen, Kimberley J., MD</creatorcontrib><title>Stent effects on duplex velocity estimates</title><title>The Journal of surgical research</title><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><description>Abstract Background Doppler-derived velocity criteria used to define the presence and severity of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous angioplasty and endoluminal stenting have been called into question. This study uses an in vitro flow model to examine Doppler-derived velocities after placement of balloon-expandable and self-expanding endoluminal stents (BES and SES). Methods An in vitro vascular circuit model consisting of a pulsatile pump, tubing, and a conduit was created. The pump was programmed to replicate the Doppler spectral waveform pattern of the renal and carotid arteries. Peak systolic velocity (PSV) and end diastolic velocity (EDV) were estimated at five distinct conduit locations. Three replicate velocity measurements were made at each location. After initial velocity estimates, a BES or an SES was deployed within the conduit. Results Mean ± standard error PSV was 95.8 ± 2.6 cm/s, 97.0 ± 2.7 cm/s, and 101.4 ± 2.7 cm/s for unstented, BES and SES, respectively. PSV estimates were increased between unstented and stented conduits when SESs were present. The increase in mean systolic velocity of 6.4% observed with SES was statistically significant ( P &lt; 0.05). EDV values did not differ significantly across conditions. Mean ± standard error EDV was 36.2 ± 1.0 cm/s, 37.3 ± 1.1 cm/s, and 37.2 ± 1.1 cm/s for unstented, BES, and SES, respectively. Conclusion The presence of an SES was associated with a less than 7% change in estimated PSV. These results suggest that Doppler velocity estimates for renal and carotid arteries are not materially affected by either BES or SES.</description><subject>Blood Flow Velocity</subject><subject>Intraluminal stent effects</subject><subject>Laser-Doppler Flowmetry</subject><subject>Stenting</subject><subject>Stents</subject><subject>Surgery</subject><subject>Velocity criteria</subject><subject>Velocity estimates</subject><issn>0022-4804</issn><issn>1095-8673</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kV1LwzAUhoMoOqc_wBvppQitJx9tUwRBhl8w8GJ6HdrkBFK7djbtcP_ejE0vvPAqBN7nTc5zCLmgkFCg2U2d1N4nDChLgCcA4oBMKBRpLLOcH5IJAGOxkCBOyKn3NYR7kfNjcsJ4FviMT8j1YsB2iNBa1IOPujYy46rBr2iNTafdsInQD25ZDujPyJEtG4_n-3NK3h8f3mbP8fz16WV2P4-1ADnEhucVl0ywjJkq19YakxudVpnWUJSWauAapQAjK5kaayQ3prAgshSNqCjyKbna9a767nMMz6ul8xqbpmyxG72iPCsYFwXkIUp3Ud133vdo1aoPn-03ioLaKlK1CorUVpECroKiwFzu68dqieaX-HESAre7AIYh1w575bXDVqNxfZCkTOf-rb_7Q-vGtU6XzQdu0Nfd2LfBnqLKB0YttjvarogyCIVpyr8BZHaLhA</recordid><startdate>20130701</startdate><enddate>20130701</enddate><creator>Kuppler, Christopher S., MD</creator><creator>Christie, Jason W., MD</creator><creator>Newton, William B., MD</creator><creator>Ghanami, Racheed J., MD</creator><creator>Craven, Timothy E., MSPH</creator><creator>Berry, Joel L., PhD</creator><creator>Hansen, Kimberley J., MD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130701</creationdate><title>Stent effects on duplex velocity estimates</title><author>Kuppler, Christopher S., MD ; Christie, Jason W., MD ; Newton, William B., MD ; Ghanami, Racheed J., MD ; Craven, Timothy E., MSPH ; Berry, Joel L., PhD ; Hansen, Kimberley J., MD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-d37b3824262db7cffdd7dc5b6cc09af1c03ce840d8b85dfd83dd9f0465ed4b1e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Blood Flow Velocity</topic><topic>Intraluminal stent effects</topic><topic>Laser-Doppler Flowmetry</topic><topic>Stenting</topic><topic>Stents</topic><topic>Surgery</topic><topic>Velocity criteria</topic><topic>Velocity estimates</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kuppler, Christopher S., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christie, Jason W., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Newton, William B., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghanami, Racheed J., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Craven, Timothy E., MSPH</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Berry, Joel L., PhD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hansen, Kimberley J., MD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kuppler, Christopher S., MD</au><au>Christie, Jason W., MD</au><au>Newton, William B., MD</au><au>Ghanami, Racheed J., MD</au><au>Craven, Timothy E., MSPH</au><au>Berry, Joel L., PhD</au><au>Hansen, Kimberley J., MD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Stent effects on duplex velocity estimates</atitle><jtitle>The Journal of surgical research</jtitle><addtitle>J Surg Res</addtitle><date>2013-07-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>183</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>457</spage><epage>461</epage><pages>457-461</pages><issn>0022-4804</issn><eissn>1095-8673</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background Doppler-derived velocity criteria used to define the presence and severity of in-stent restenosis after percutaneous angioplasty and endoluminal stenting have been called into question. This study uses an in vitro flow model to examine Doppler-derived velocities after placement of balloon-expandable and self-expanding endoluminal stents (BES and SES). Methods An in vitro vascular circuit model consisting of a pulsatile pump, tubing, and a conduit was created. The pump was programmed to replicate the Doppler spectral waveform pattern of the renal and carotid arteries. Peak systolic velocity (PSV) and end diastolic velocity (EDV) were estimated at five distinct conduit locations. Three replicate velocity measurements were made at each location. After initial velocity estimates, a BES or an SES was deployed within the conduit. Results Mean ± standard error PSV was 95.8 ± 2.6 cm/s, 97.0 ± 2.7 cm/s, and 101.4 ± 2.7 cm/s for unstented, BES and SES, respectively. PSV estimates were increased between unstented and stented conduits when SESs were present. The increase in mean systolic velocity of 6.4% observed with SES was statistically significant ( P &lt; 0.05). EDV values did not differ significantly across conditions. Mean ± standard error EDV was 36.2 ± 1.0 cm/s, 37.3 ± 1.1 cm/s, and 37.2 ± 1.1 cm/s for unstented, BES, and SES, respectively. Conclusion The presence of an SES was associated with a less than 7% change in estimated PSV. These results suggest that Doppler velocity estimates for renal and carotid arteries are not materially affected by either BES or SES.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>23601663</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jss.2012.03.004</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-4804
ispartof The Journal of surgical research, 2013-07, Vol.183 (1), p.457-461
issn 0022-4804
1095-8673
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1369234907
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Blood Flow Velocity
Intraluminal stent effects
Laser-Doppler Flowmetry
Stenting
Stents
Surgery
Velocity criteria
Velocity estimates
title Stent effects on duplex velocity estimates
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-08T04%3A47%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Stent%20effects%20on%20duplex%20velocity%20estimates&rft.jtitle=The%20Journal%20of%20surgical%20research&rft.au=Kuppler,%20Christopher%20S.,%20MD&rft.date=2013-07-01&rft.volume=183&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=457&rft.epage=461&rft.pages=457-461&rft.issn=0022-4804&rft.eissn=1095-8673&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jss.2012.03.004&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1369234907%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1369234907&rft_id=info:pmid/23601663&rft_els_id=S0022480412001655&rfr_iscdi=true