Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 30, 2025
Experimental Investigation of Secondary Flow Structures Downstream of a Model Type IV Stent Failure in a 180° Curved Artery Test Section
Published on: July 19, 2016
In Vitro Radiological Evaluation of Different Types of Chimney Stents Using a Silicon Flow Model with Adjustable
Gergana T Taneva1, Marco V Usai2, Georgios A Pitoulias3
1Department of Vascular Surgery and Angiology, Puerta de Hierro and Montepríncipe University Hospitals, Madrid, Spain.
Objective:
To evaluate in vitro the performance of in vivo published covered or bare metal chimney stents (ChSs) in combination with the Endurant II abdominal endograft (Medtronic) as the only CE approved main graft (MG) in the treatment of juxtarenal abdominal aortic aneurysms with the chimney endovascular aneurysm repair (chEVAR) technique.
Methods:
Bench top experimental study. A silicon flow model with adjustable physiological simulating conditions and patient based anatomy was used to test nine different MG-ChS combinations: Advanta V12 (Getinge); BeGraft+ (Bentley); VBX (Gore & Associates Inc.); LifeStream (Bard Medical); Dynamic (Biotronik); Absolute Pro (Abbott); double Absolute Pro; Viabahn (Gore) lined with Dynamic; and Viabahn lined with EverFlex (Medtronic). Angiotomography was performed after each implantation. DICOM data were analysed blindly twice per observer by three independent experienced observers. Each blinded evaluation was performed at one month intervals. The main analysed parameters were the area of gutters, MG and ChS maximum compression, and the presence of infolding.
Results:
Bland-Altman analysis confirmed adequate results correlation (p < .05). Each employed ChS showed significantly different performance favouring the balloon expandable covered stent (BECS). The smallest gutter area was seen in the combination with Advanta V12 (0.26 cm2). MG infolding was observed in all tests. The lowest ChS compression was observed in the combination with BeGraft+ (compression 4.91%, D ratio 0.95). In our model, BECSs showed higher angulations than bare metal stents (BMSs) (p < .001).
Conclusion:
This in vitro study shows the variability of performance with each theoretically possible ChS and explains the divergent ChS outcomes in the published literature. BECS in combination with the Endurant abdominal device confirms their superiority vs. BMS. The presence of MG infolding in each test underlines the need for prolonged kissing ballooning. Angulation evaluation and comparison with other in vitro and in vivo publications demands the need for further investigation in transversely or upwardly oriented target vessels.
