Impact of Fluoropolymer-Based Paclitaxel Delivery on Neointimal Proliferation and Vascular Healing

Abstract

BACKGROUND A polymer-free peripheral paclitaxel-eluting stent (PES, Zilver PTX, Cook, IN) has shown to improve vessel patency after superficial femoral angioplasty. A new-generation fluoropolymer-based PES (FP-PES; Eluvia, Boston Scientific, MA) displaying more controlled and sustained paclitaxel delivery promise to improve the clinical outcomes of first-generation PES. We sought to compare the biological effect of paclitaxel delivered by 2 different stent-coating technologies (fluoropolymer-based versus polymer-free) on neointimal proliferation and healing response in the familial hypercholesterolemic swine model of femoral restenosis. METHODS AND RESULTS The biological efficacy of clinically available FP-PES (n=12) and PES (n=12) was compared against a bare metal stent control (n=12; Innova, Boston Scientific, MA) after implantation in the femoral arteries of 18 familial hypercholesterolemic swine. Longitudinal quantitative vascular angiography and optical coherence tomography were performed at baseline and at 30 and 90 days. Histological evaluation was performed at 90 days. Ninety-day quantitative vascular angiography results showed a lower percent diameter stenosis for FP-PES (38.78% [31.27-47.66]) compared with PES (54.16% [42.60-61.97]) and bare metal stent (74.52% [47.23-100.00];P<0.001). Ninety-day optical coherence tomography results demonstrated significantly lower neointimal area in FP-PES (8.01 mm2[7.65-9.21]) compared with PES (10.95 mm2[9.64-12.46]) and bare metal stent (13.83 mm2[11.53-17.03];P<0.001). Histological evaluation showed larger lumen areas and evidence of higher biological activity (smooth muscle cell loss and fibrin deposition) in the FP-PES compared with PES and bare metal stent. CONCLUSIONS In the familial hypercholesterolemic swine model of femoral restenosis, the implantation of an FP-PES resulted in lower levels of neointimal proliferation and sustained biological effect ≤90 days compared with a polymer-free stent-based approach.