Archives of cardiovascular diseases · 2020
In vitro comparison of three percutaneous atrial septal defect closure devices for endothelialisation and haemocompatibility.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Levy Yael, Jalal Zakaria, Aussel Audrey, Thebaud Noélie B, Renard Martine, Bareille Reine, Ripoche Jean, Durand Marlène, Thambo Jean-Benoit, Bordenave Laurence
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous device closure of atrial septal defect (ASD) is the gold-standard treatment, but several delayed complications may occur as a result of incomplete device endothelialisation.
AIMS: In this in vitro study, we compared three ASD closure devices [Nit-Occlud® ASD-R (device 1); Hyperion™ ASDO (device 2); and Amplatzer™ Septal Occluder (device 3)] in terms of the endothelialisation process, using human endothelial progenitors cells (EPCs), and haemocompatibility.
METHODS: EPCs from umbilical cord blood were extracted, cultured and characterised. Device samples were seeded with 100,000 cells/cm2. EPC adhesion was investigated at 3 and 24hours, and EPC proliferation was monitored, which allowed longitudinal follow-up (days 1-12). Haemocompatibility of device samples was assessed using a complement C3a assay and platelet and coagulation activation.
RESULTS: With regard to EPC adhesion and proliferation, no statistically significant differences were found between the three devices. We observed for each device a significant time-dependent EPC proliferation, appearing at day 8 for devices 2 and 3 and day 10 for device 1. No complement or platelet activation occurred within 15minutes of contact with devices. However, there was minimal activation of coagulation for the three devices.
CONCLUSIONS: In this in vitro study we showed that, despite the three ASD occluders having different device designs and coatings, adhesion and proliferation of human endothelial cells was similar for all devices. This should be further confirmed by similar studies including shear stress forces and anti-thrombotic treatments.
AIMS: In this in vitro study, we compared three ASD closure devices [Nit-Occlud® ASD-R (device 1); Hyperion™ ASDO (device 2); and Amplatzer™ Septal Occluder (device 3)] in terms of the endothelialisation process, using human endothelial progenitors cells (EPCs), and haemocompatibility.
METHODS: EPCs from umbilical cord blood were extracted, cultured and characterised. Device samples were seeded with 100,000 cells/cm2. EPC adhesion was investigated at 3 and 24hours, and EPC proliferation was monitored, which allowed longitudinal follow-up (days 1-12). Haemocompatibility of device samples was assessed using a complement C3a assay and platelet and coagulation activation.
RESULTS: With regard to EPC adhesion and proliferation, no statistically significant differences were found between the three devices. We observed for each device a significant time-dependent EPC proliferation, appearing at day 8 for devices 2 and 3 and day 10 for device 1. No complement or platelet activation occurred within 15minutes of contact with devices. However, there was minimal activation of coagulation for the three devices.
CONCLUSIONS: In this in vitro study we showed that, despite the three ASD occluders having different device designs and coatings, adhesion and proliferation of human endothelial cells was similar for all devices. This should be further confirmed by similar studies including shear stress forces and anti-thrombotic treatments.