Subacute Stent Deformities as an Underlying Reason for Vessel Stenosis after Flow Diversion with the p64 Stent: Review and Discussion of Biologic Mechanisms and Consequences

References

1. 1.↵
   1. Lylyk P,
   2. Miranda C,
   3. Ceratto R, et al

   . Curative endovascular reconstruction of cerebral aneurysms with the Pipeline embolization device: the Buenos Aires experience. Neurosurgery 2009;64:632–43 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000339109.98070.65 pmid:19349825

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
2. 2.↵
   1. Pierot L

   . Flow diverter stents in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: where are we? J Neuroradiol 2011;38:40–46 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2010.12.002 pmid:21257202

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Gester K,
   2. Lüchtefeld I,
   3. Büsen M, et al

   . In vitro evaluation of intra-aneurysmal, flow-diverter-induced thrombus formation: a feasibility study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2016;37:490–96 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A4555 pmid:26450536

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
4. 4.↵
   1. Sadasivan C,
   2. Cesar L,
   3. Seong J, et al

   . An original flow diversion device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: evaluation in the rabbit elastase-induced model. Stroke 2009;40:952–58 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.533760 pmid:19150864

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
5. 5.↵
   1. Zhang Y,
   2. Wang Y,
   3. Kao E, et al

   . Towards optimal flow diverter porosity for the treatment of intracranial aneurysm. J Biomech 2019;82:20–27 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.10.002 pmid:30381156

   CrossRefPubMed
6. 6.↵
   1. Ravindran K,
   2. Salem MM,
   3. Alturki AY, et al

   . Endothelialization following flow diversion for intracranial aneurysms: a systematic review. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2019;40:295–301 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A5955 pmid:30679207

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
7. 7.↵
   1. Fiorella D,
   2. Lylyk P,
   3. Szikora I, et al

   . Curative cerebrovascular reconstruction with the Pipeline embolization device: the emergence of definitive endovascular therapy for intracranial aneurysms. J Neurointerv Surg 2009;1:56–65 doi:10.1136/jnis.2009.000083 pmid:21994109

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
8. 8.↵
   1. Texakalidis P,
   2. Bekelis K,
   3. Atallah E, et al

   . Flow diversion with the Pipeline embolization device for patients with intracranial aneurysms and antiplatelet therapy: a systematic literature review. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2017;161:78–87 doi:10.1016/j.clineuro.2017.08.003 pmid:28863286

   CrossRefPubMed
9. 9.↵
   1. Galli M,
   2. Franchi F,
   3. Rollini F, et al

   . Platelet P2Y12 inhibiting therapy in adjunct to vascular dose of rivaroxaban or aspirin: a pharmacodynamic study of dual pathway inhibition vs. dual antiplatelet therapy. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother 2022;8:728–37 doi:10.1093/ehjcvp/pvac022 pmid:35353154

   CrossRefPubMed
10. 10.↵
    1. Van Belle E,
    2. Tio FO,
    3. Couffinhal T, et al

    . Stent endothelialization: time course, impact of local catheter delivery, feasibility of recombinant protein administration, and response to cytokine expedition. Circulation 1997;95:438–48 doi:10.1161/01.cir.95.2.438 pmid:9008462

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. Berge J,
    2. Biondi A,
    3. Machi P, et al

    . Flow-diverter Silk stent for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: 1-year follow-up in a multicenter study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1150–55 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2907 pmid:22300924

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Guzzardi G,
    2. Galbiati A,
    3. Stanca C, et al

    . Flow diverter stents with hydrophilic polymer coating for the treatment of acutely ruptured aneurysms using single antiplatelet therapy: preliminary experience. Interv Neuroradiol 2020;26:525–31 doi:10.1177/1591019920950878 pmid:32799747

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Fiehler J,
    2. Ortega-Gutierrez S,
    3. Anagnostakou V, et al

    . Evaluation of flow diverters for cerebral aneurysm therapy: recommendations for imaging analyses in clinical studies, endorsed by ESMINT, ESNR, OCIN, SILAN, SNIS, and WFITN. J Neurointerv Surg Epub ahead of print June 2, 2024 doi:10.1136/jnis-2023-021404

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
14. 14.↵
    1. Gui S,
    2. Chen X,
    3. Wei D, et al

    . Long-term outcomes and dynamic changes of in-stent stenosis after Pipeline embolization device treatment of intracranial aneurysms. J NeuroInterventional Surg 2023;15:1187–93

    CrossRef
15. 15.↵
    1. You W,
    2. Lv J,
    3. Li Z, et al

    . The incidence and predictors of in-stent stenosis after Pipeline flow-diverter stenting for intracranial aneurysm treatment. Front Neurol 2023;14:1140497 doi:10.3389/fneur.2023.1140497 pmid:37181557

    CrossRefPubMed
16. 16.↵
    1. John S,
    2. Bain MD,
    3. Hui FK, et al

    . Long-term follow-up of in-stent stenosis after Pipeline flow diversion treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery 2016;78:862–67 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001146 pmid:26600281

    CrossRefPubMed
17. 17.↵
    1. Essbaiheen F,
    2. AlQahtani H,
    3. Almansoori TM, et al

    . Transient in-stent stenosis at mid-term angiographic follow-up in patients treated with SILK flow diverter stents: incidence, clinical significance and long-term follow-up. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:166–70 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-013928 pmid:30194108

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
18. 18.↵
    1. Kim SJ,
    2. Kim YJ,
    3. Ko JH

    . Long term outcome of in-stent stenosis after stent assisted coil embolization for cerebral aneurysm. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2019;62:536–44 doi:10.3340/jkns.2019.0087 pmid:31484229

    CrossRefPubMed
19. 19.↵
    1. Schwartz RS,
    2. Chronos NA,
    3. Virmani R

    . Preclinical restenosis models and drug-eluting stents. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:1373–85 doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2004.04.060

    FREE Full Text
20. 20.↵
    1. Caroff J,
    2. Iacobucci M,
    3. Rouchaud A, et al

    . The occurrence of neointimal hyperplasia after flow-diverter implantation is associated with cardiovascular risks factors and the stent design. J Neurointerv Surg 2019;11:610–13 doi:10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014441 pmid:30415222

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Lehoux S,
    2. Tedgui A

    . Signal transduction of mechanical stresses in the vascular wall. Hypertension 1998;32:338–45 doi:10.1161/01.hyp.32.2.338 pmid:9719064

    CrossRefPubMed
22. 22.↵
    1. Lu D,
    2. Kassab GS

    . Role of shear stress and stretch in vascular mechanobiology. J R Soc Interface 2011;8:1379–85 doi:10.1098/rsif.2011.0177 pmid:21733876

    CrossRefPubMed
23. 23.↵
    1. Davies PF

    . Flow-mediated endothelial mechanotransduction. Physiol Rev 1995;75:519–60 doi:10.1152/physrev.1995.75.3.519 pmid:7624393

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
24. 24.↵
    1. Haas TA,
    2. Plow EF

    . Integrin-ligarid interactions: a year in review. Curr Opin Cell Biol 1994;6:656–62 doi:10.1016/0955-0674(94)90091-4 pmid:7833046

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
25. 25.↵
    1. Lo SH,
    2. Weisberg E,
    3. Chen LB

    . Tensin: a potential link between the cytoskeleton and signal transduction. BioEssays 1994;16:817–23 doi:10.1002/bies.950161108 pmid:7840759

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Kornberg L,
    2. Earp HS,
    3. Parsons JT, et al

    . Cell adhesion or integrin clustering increases phosphorylation of a focal adhesion-associated tyrosine kinase. J Biol Chem 1992;267:23439–42 pmid:1429685

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
27. 27.↵
    1. Sokabe M,
    2. Nunogaki K,
    3. Naruse K, et al

    . Mechanics of patch clamped and intact cell-membranes in relation to SA channel activation. Jpn J Physiol 1993;43(Suppl 1):S197–204 pmid:7505855

    PubMed
28. 28.↵
    1. Burridge K,
    2. Fath K,
    3. Kelly T, et al

    . Focal adhesions: transmembrane junctions between the extracellular matrix and the cytoskeleton. Annu Rev Cell Biol 1988;4:487–525 doi:10.1146/annurev.cb.04.110188.002415 pmid:3058164

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
29. 29.↵
    1. Zhao S,
    2. Suciu A,
    3. Ziegler T, et al

    . Synergistic effects of fluid shear stress and cyclic circumferential stretch on vascular endothelial cell morphology and cytoskeleton. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1995;15:1781–86 doi:10.1161/01.atv.15.10.1781 pmid:7583556

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
30. 30.↵
    1. Tousoulis D,
    2. Kampoli AM,
    3. Tentolouris N, et al

    . The role of nitric oxide on endothelial function. Curr Vasc Pharmacol 2012;10:4–18 doi:10.2174/157016112798829760 pmid:22112350

    CrossRefPubMed
31. 31.↵
    1. Zhao Y,
    2. Vanhoutte PM,
    3. Leung SWS

    . Vascular nitric oxide: beyond eNOS. J Pharmacol Sci 2015;129:83–94 doi:10.1016/j.jphs.2015.09.002 pmid:26499181

    CrossRefPubMed
32. 32.↵
    1. Schulz E,
    2. Gori T,
    3. Münzel T

    . Oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction in hypertension. Hypertens Res 2011;34:665–73 doi:10.1038/hr.2011.39 pmid:21512515

    CrossRefPubMed
33. 33.↵
    1. Sun D,
    2. Huang A,
    3. Smith CJ, et al

    . Enhanced release of prostaglandins contributes to flow-induced arteriolar dilation in eNOS knockout mice. Circ Res 1999;85:288–93 doi:10.1161/01.res.85.3.288 pmid:10436172

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
34. 34.↵
    1. Chen J,
    2. Zhou Y,
    3. Liu S, et al

    . Biomechanical signal communication in vascular smooth muscle cells. J Cell Commun Signal 2020;14:357–76 doi:10.1007/s12079-020-00576-1 pmid:32780323

    CrossRefPubMed
35. 35.↵
    1. Martinez-Quinones P,
    2. McCarthy CG,
    3. Watts SW, et al

    . Hypertension induced morphological and physiological changes in cells of the arterial wall. Am J Hypertens 2018;31:1067–78 doi:10.1093/ajh/hpy083 pmid:29788246

    CrossRefPubMed
36. 36.↵
    1. Seger R,
    2. Krebs EG

    . The MAPK signaling cascade. FASEB J 1995;9:726–35 doi:10.1096/fasebj.9.9.7601337

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
37. 37.↵
    1. Malek AM,
    2. Gibbons GH,
    3. Dzau VJ, et al

    . Fluid shear stress differentially modulates expression of genes encoding basic fibroblast growth factor and platelet-derived growth factor B chain in vascular endothelium. J Clin Invest 1993;92:2013–21 doi:10.1172/JCI116796 pmid:8408655

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
38. 38.↵
    1. Chen HY,
    2. Hermiller J,
    3. Sinha AK, et al

    . Effects of stent sizing on endothelial and vessel wall stress: potential mechanisms for in-stent restenosis. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2009;106:1686–91 doi:10.1152/japplphysiol.91519.2008 pmid:19299567

    CrossRefPubMed
39. 39.↵
    1. Wang J,
    2. Jin X,
    3. Huang Y, et al

    . Endovascular stent-induced alterations in host artery mechanical environments and their roles in stent restenosis and late thrombosis. Regen Biomater 2018;5:177–87 doi:10.1093/rb/rby006 pmid:29942650

    CrossRefPubMed
40. 40.↵
    1. Haga JH,
    2. Li YSJ,
    3. Chien S

    . Molecular basis of the effects of mechanical stretch on vascular smooth muscle cells. J Biomech 2007;40:947–60 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.04.011 pmid:16867303

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
41. 41.↵
    1. Welt FGP,
    2. Rogers C

    . Inflammation and restenosis in the stent era. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2002;22:1769–76 doi:10.1161/01.atv.0000037100.44766.5b pmid:12426203

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
42. 42.↵
    1. Schob S,
    2. Richter C,
    3. Scherlach C, et al

    . Delayed stroke after aneurysm treatment with flow diverters in small cerebral vessels: a potentially critical complication caused by subacute vasospasm. J Clin Med 2019;8:1649 doi:10.3390/jcm8101649

    CrossRefPubMed
43. 43.↵
    1. Von Elm E,
    2. Altman DG,
    3. Egger M, et al

    ; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg 2014;12:1495–99 doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2014.07.013 pmid:25046131

    CrossRefPubMed
44. 44.↵
    1. Aguilar Pérez M,
    2. Bhogal P,
    3. Henkes E, et al

    . In-stent stenosis after p64 flow diverter treatment. Clin Neuroradiol 2018;28:563–68 doi:10.1007/s00062-017-0591-y pmid:28488025

    CrossRefPubMed
45. 45.↵
    1. Chalouhi N,
    2. Polifka A,
    3. Daou B, et al

    . In-pipeline stenosis: incidence, predictors, and clinical outcomes. Neurosurgery 2015;77:875–79 doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000000908 pmid:26200770

    CrossRefPubMed
46. 46.↵
    1. Alderazi YJ,
    2. Shastri D,
    3. Kass-Hout T, et al

    . Flow diverters for intracranial aneurysms. Stroke Res Treat 2014;2014:415653–12 doi:10.1155/2014/415653 pmid:24967131

    CrossRefPubMed
47. 47.↵
    1. Makoyeva A,
    2. Bing F,
    3. Darsaut TE, et al

    . The varying porosity of braided self-expanding stents and flow diverters: an experimental study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:596–602 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3234 pmid:22878007

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
48. 48.↵
    1. Shapiro M,
    2. Raz E,
    3. Becske T, et al

    . Variable porosity of the Pipeline embolization device in straight and curved vessels: a guide for optimal deployment strategy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:727–33 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3742 pmid:24072622

    Abstract/FREE Full Text