PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Tawfiq R Choudhury AU - Salwan Al-Saigh AU - Steve Burley AU - Lin Li AU - Nizar Shakhshir AU - Nazanin Mirhosseini AU - Tao Wang AU - Samer Arnous AU - Muhammad A Khan AU - Mamas A Mamas AU - Douglas G W Fraser TI - Longitudinal deformation bench testing using a coronary artery model: a new standard? AID - 10.1136/openhrt-2016-000537 DP - 2017 Nov 01 TA - Open Heart PG - e000537 VI - 4 IP - 2 4099 - http://openheart.bmj.com/content/4/2/e000537.short 4100 - http://openheart.bmj.com/content/4/2/e000537.full SO - Open Heart2017 Nov 01; 4 AB - Objectives To compare susceptibility of five different stent platforms with longitudinal stent deformation (LSD) using a clinically relevant bench testing model simulating both short and long malapposed lengths.Background Recent data suggest that design modifications to the Promus Element stent which led to the Promus Premier stent has reduced susceptibility to LSD. However, susceptibility to LSD at long malapposed lengths has not been tested. Furthermore, the mechanisms behind susceptibility to LSD are as yet unclear.Methods The Omega, Integrity, Multilink 8, Biomatrixand Promus Premier stent platforms were tested. The Omega, Integrity and Multilink 8 platforms were used in place of their drug-eluting equivalents. 3.5 mm stents were deployed in a stepped tube with the distal portion fixed and the proximal test section exposed. The force required to compress stents by a fixed distance at different exposed lengths was compared. Symmetrical and point loading were used.Results The Promus Premier was longitudinally as strong as Multilink and Integrity at a short exposed length (4 mm) but weaker, in between Omega and the other platforms, at longer exposed lengths (12 mm). As previously noted, the Omega (Promus Element) platform was significantly weaker than the other stents and Biomatrix was the strongest stent.Conclusion Susceptibility to LSD varies depending on length of malapposed segment when tested using a clinically relevant model as in this study. The mechanisms behind the susceptibility are likely multifactorial, including connector number, strut thickness, connector alignment and ring orientation but remain to be elucidated.