Yong Wu, Kejia Zhao, Yunhan Cai, Yibin Fang, Shengzhang Wang
{"title":"A comparative study on the efficacy of two different types of intracranial stent retrievers based on finite element simulation.","authors":"Yong Wu, Kejia Zhao, Yunhan Cai, Yibin Fang, Shengzhang Wang","doi":"10.1038/s41598-025-94837-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study investigates the thrombectomy performance of open (Solitaire FR 6 × 30) and closed (Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25) stent retrievers in patient-specific vasculature using finite element analysis (FEA). The aim is to inform stent design optimization and improve surgical strategies. Patient-specific vascular models, thrombus models, and stent retriever models were constructed using CAD software. FEA simulated the thrombectomy procedure, and the simulation results were validated through in vitro experiments. The FEA predicted successful thrombus retrieval with the Solitaire FR 6 × 30, consistent with in vitro findings. Conversely, the Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25 failed to retrieve the thrombus in the simulation. During Solitaire FR 6 × 30 thrombectomy, maximum thrombus stress (48.733 MPa), strain (2.257) and contact pressure on the vessel wall (7.177 MPa) were substantially higher than those observed during Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25 thrombectomy (15.824 MPa, 1.554, and 1.872 MPa, respectively). Specifically, the Solitaire FR 6 × 30 induced 3.19 times greater maximum thrombus stress, 1.45 times greater maximum thrombus strain, and 2.83 times greater maximum vessel wall contact pressure. These findings suggest that the Solitaire FR stent retriever demonstrates superior thrombectomy efficacy compared to the Trevo XP stent retriever, likely attributable to its higher radial support force. However, the increased force exerted on the thrombus and vessel wall by the Solitaire FR raises the potential risk of thrombus fragmentation and vascular injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":21811,"journal":{"name":"Scientific Reports","volume":"15 1","pages":"10592"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11950397/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Scientific Reports","FirstCategoryId":"103","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-94837-x","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This study investigates the thrombectomy performance of open (Solitaire FR 6 × 30) and closed (Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25) stent retrievers in patient-specific vasculature using finite element analysis (FEA). The aim is to inform stent design optimization and improve surgical strategies. Patient-specific vascular models, thrombus models, and stent retriever models were constructed using CAD software. FEA simulated the thrombectomy procedure, and the simulation results were validated through in vitro experiments. The FEA predicted successful thrombus retrieval with the Solitaire FR 6 × 30, consistent with in vitro findings. Conversely, the Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25 failed to retrieve the thrombus in the simulation. During Solitaire FR 6 × 30 thrombectomy, maximum thrombus stress (48.733 MPa), strain (2.257) and contact pressure on the vessel wall (7.177 MPa) were substantially higher than those observed during Trevo XP ProVue 6 × 25 thrombectomy (15.824 MPa, 1.554, and 1.872 MPa, respectively). Specifically, the Solitaire FR 6 × 30 induced 3.19 times greater maximum thrombus stress, 1.45 times greater maximum thrombus strain, and 2.83 times greater maximum vessel wall contact pressure. These findings suggest that the Solitaire FR stent retriever demonstrates superior thrombectomy efficacy compared to the Trevo XP stent retriever, likely attributable to its higher radial support force. However, the increased force exerted on the thrombus and vessel wall by the Solitaire FR raises the potential risk of thrombus fragmentation and vascular injury.
期刊介绍:
We publish original research from all areas of the natural sciences, psychology, medicine and engineering. You can learn more about what we publish by browsing our specific scientific subject areas below or explore Scientific Reports by browsing all articles and collections.
Scientific Reports has a 2-year impact factor: 4.380 (2021), and is the 6th most-cited journal in the world, with more than 540,000 citations in 2020 (Clarivate Analytics, 2021).
•Engineering
Engineering covers all aspects of engineering, technology, and applied science. It plays a crucial role in the development of technologies to address some of the world''s biggest challenges, helping to save lives and improve the way we live.
•Physical sciences
Physical sciences are those academic disciplines that aim to uncover the underlying laws of nature — often written in the language of mathematics. It is a collective term for areas of study including astronomy, chemistry, materials science and physics.
•Earth and environmental sciences
Earth and environmental sciences cover all aspects of Earth and planetary science and broadly encompass solid Earth processes, surface and atmospheric dynamics, Earth system history, climate and climate change, marine and freshwater systems, and ecology. It also considers the interactions between humans and these systems.
•Biological sciences
Biological sciences encompass all the divisions of natural sciences examining various aspects of vital processes. The concept includes anatomy, physiology, cell biology, biochemistry and biophysics, and covers all organisms from microorganisms, animals to plants.
•Health sciences
The health sciences study health, disease and healthcare. This field of study aims to develop knowledge, interventions and technology for use in healthcare to improve the treatment of patients.