↓ Skip to main content

Flow diverter effect of LVIS stent on cerebral aneurysm hemodynamics: a comparison with Enterprise stents and the Pipeline device

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
156 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
92 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Flow diverter effect of LVIS stent on cerebral aneurysm hemodynamics: a comparison with Enterprise stents and the Pipeline device
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, July 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12967-016-0959-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chao Wang, Zhongbin Tian, Jian Liu, Linkai Jing, Nikhil Paliwal, Shengzhang Wang, Ying Zhang, Jianping Xiang, Adnan H. Siddiqui, Hui Meng, Xinjian Yang

Abstract

The aim of this study was to quantify the effect of the new Low-profile Visualized Intraluminal Support (LVIS®D) device and the difference of fluid diverting effect compared with the Pipeline device and the Enterprise stent using computational fluid dynamics (CFD). In this research, we simulated three aneurysms constructed from 3D digital subtraction angiography (DSA). The Enterprise, LVIS and the Pipeline device were virtually conformed to fit into the vessel lumen and placed across the aneurysm orifice. Computational fluid dynamics analysis was performed to compare the hemodynamic differences such as WSS, Velocity and Pressure among these stents. Control referred to the unstented model, the percentage of hemodynamic changes were all compared to Control. A single LVIS stent caused more wall shear stress reduction than double Enterprise stents (39.96 vs. 30.51 %) and velocity (23.13 vs. 18.64 %). Significant reduction in wall shear stress (63.88 %) and velocity (46.05 %) was observed in the double-LVIS stents. A single Pipeline showed less reduction in WSS (51.08 %) and velocity (37.87 %) compared with double-LVIS stent. The double-Pipeline stents resulted in the most reduction in WSS (72.37 %) and velocity (54.26 %). Moreover, the pressure increased with minuscule extent after stenting, compared with the unstented model. This is the first study analyzing flow modifications associated with LVIS stents. We found that the LVIS stent has certain hemodynamic effects on cerebral aneurysms: a single LVIS stent caused more flow reductions than the double-Enterprise stent but less than a Pipeline device. Nevertheless, the double-LVIS stent resulted in a better flow diverting effect than a Pipeline device.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 92 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 91 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 11%
Student > Master 9 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 9%
Student > Postgraduate 8 9%
Other 20 22%
Unknown 25 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 20 22%
Engineering 17 18%
Neuroscience 12 13%
Psychology 3 3%
Chemical Engineering 2 2%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 30 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2016.
All research outputs
#16,805,739
of 25,494,370 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#2,358
of 4,661 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#227,036
of 366,259 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#52
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,494,370 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,661 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 366,259 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.