Objectives. The purpose of this study is to compare the stent strut distribution between Cypher and Taxus stents by using optical coherence tomography (OCT) in a phantom model. Background. Previous studies demonstrated that the distribution of stent struts might affect amount of neointima proliferation after drug-eluting stent (DES) implantation. Methods. We developed experimental models made of silicon tubing angled at 0°, 30°, and 60°. Testing was performed on two types of stents, Cypher and Taxus, which represent current FDA-approved DES. After deployment, OCT was performed and measurements were obtained as follows at two cross sections; maximum and minimum numbers of visualized stent strut sites: (1) number of visualized stent struts; (2) angle between stent struts (interstrut angle); (3) mean interstrut angle; (4) the delta mean angle was defined as the margin between each value of the interstrut angle and mean interstrut angle. Results. In the Cypher stent, both the interstrut angle and the delta mean angle were significantly better than all other stents evaluated (all comparisons between stents; p < 0.05, respectively). Conclusions. The present study found that the stent strut distribution of two stents, Cypher and Taxus, which represent current FDA-approved drug-eluting systems, were significantly different and suggested that the Cypher stent maintained a more regular strut distribution despite expansion in various anatomical situations, and therefore would provide the most regular and predictable drug delivery.

       Recent studies have shown that the use of drug-eluting stents (DES) to deliver antiproliferative agents directly to the vessel wall dramatically reduces the rate of restenosis. However, differences among stent designs, drug delivery vehicles, and choices of pharmacologic agents can significantly affect the safety and efficacy of each device. Thus, focused study on the various constituents of delivery platforms, including the stent backbone, materials used as drug delivery vehicles and the physicochemical properties of the

Figure 1

Stent strut distribution by OCT. The white arrows point out the stent struts. The angle between stent struts (q) was defined as an interstrut angle.

pharmacotherapeutic agents themselves is indicated.^1,2 In addition, several clinical trials compared the Taxus^® (Boston Scientific Corp., Natick, Massachusetts) and Cypher™ (Cordis Corp., Miami, Florida) stents, showing a difference in neointimal proliferation between these two devices, and suggesting that the drug delivery platform may account for this difference.^3–8
       Furthermore, a previous study using intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) demonstrated that the number and distribution of stent struts affect the amount of neointimal formation after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation.⁹ However, conventional IVUS provides a limited definition of vessel microstructure, such as dissection, tissue prolapse, stent strut and stent apposition on a size scale < 100 µm. On the other hand, optical coherence tomography (OCT) is an intravascular imaging modality that provides cross-sectional images of tissue, with a resolution of 10 µm.^10–12
       Thus, the purpose of this study is to compare the stent strut distribution between various stent designs using OCT in a phantom model.

Materials and Methods
       We developed an experimental model made of silicon tubing (inner diameter of 3 mm) angled at 0°, 30° and 60°. Testing was performed on the Cypher and Taxus stents which represent current FDA-approved DES systems, respectively. Each stent size used in this study was 3.0 mm. At the center of the phantom, all stents

Figure 2

IVUS and OCT images. An IVUS image (A) and an OCT image (B) at the same cross section of the phantom. The white arrows indicate the stent struts. In the OCT image, the stent struts can be detected more clearly than on the IVUS image.

were deployed at nominal pressure.

Figure 3

Typical OCT images of Cypher and Taxus stents. Typical OCT images of each stent are shown. Images (A) and (B) represent the images of Cypher and Taxus stents, respectively. The white arrows indicate the maximum interstrut angle of each image.

       After stent deployment, OCT was performed using the LightLab OCT imaging system, and a 0.014 inch Imagewire with 0.006 inch Micro-Optic core (LightLab, Westford, Massachusetts). The OCT Imagewire was advanced beyond the stent into the distal site of the phantom and withdrawn to the proximal site. OCT images were acquired at a frame rate of 15.6 Hz at 0.5 mm/second with an automatic pullback system, and were digitally archived. These procedures were performed in each stent three separate times.
       Measurements were performed at two cross sections: maximum and minimum number of visualized stent strut sites (defined as max site and min site, respectively) within 3 mm from the center of the stent. At each cross section, the following were obtained: (1) number of visualized stent struts; (2) angle between stent struts (interstrut angle); (3) mean interstrut angle; (4) the delta mean angle was defined as the margin between each value of interstrut angle and mean interstrut angle (Figure 1).
       Interobserver and intraobserver variabilities were assessed for all images and all measurements. Interobserver variability was calculated as the standard deviation of the difference between the measurements of the two independent observers and expressed as a percentage of the average value. Intraobserver variability was calculated as the standard deviation of the difference between the first and second determinations (a one-week interval) for a single observer, and expressed as a percentage of the average value. Interobserver and intraobserver variabilities for the measurement of the number of visualized stent

Figure 4

Comparisons of the maximum interstrut angle of max site (a) and min site (b) between both stents. Each line represents the Cypher (solid line) and Taxus (broken line) stents, respectively. Data are presented as frequencies or mean ± 1 SD.

struts were 0.7% and 1.2%, respectively; for measurement of the interstrut angle, they were 3.7% and 4.3%, respectively.
       Statistical Analysis. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS 13.0 software (SPSS Inc.). Data are presented as frequencies or mean ± standard deviation (SD). A p-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results
       Figure 2 shows an IVUS and an OCT image at the same cross section of the phantom. The OCT image appeared much clearer than the IVUS image. Typical OCT images of each stent are shown in Figure 3. The number of visualized stent struts at each cross section was compared (Table 1). There was no difference between each stent. Figure 4 compared each interstrut angle between each stent at the phantom angles 0°, 30° and 60°, respectively. The interstrut angles of the Cypher stent were significantly smaller than the Taxus stent (all comparisons; p < 0.05, respectively). We then compared the change of the interstrut angle between each stent (Table 2). Interstrut angles of all stents increased significantly in accordance with the phantom angle increase. Interestingly, the interstrut angle of the Taxus stent showed little change between the phantom angle 0° and 30°at the max site. However, at the min site, the Taxus angles were larger (p < 0.001). Comparisons of the delta mean angle between all stents are shown in Figure 5. Similarly, all delta mean angles of the Cypher were less than Taxus at both sites (all comparisons; p < 0.01, respectively).

Discussion
       In the bare metal stent (BMS) era, the architecture of the stent itself may have influenced the procedural success and the rate of restenosis. The evolution of BMS in areas of strut configuration, strut thickness and delivery-balloon technology has resulted in refined procedural attributes, including reduced profiles,

Figure 5

Comparisons of ? mean the angle at both sites between all stents. Comparisons of ? mean the angle at max site (a) and min site (b) are shown. The white and black bars indicate the Cypher and Taxus stents, respectively. Data are presented as frequencies or mean ± 1 SD.

increased flexibility, conformability and enhanced fluoroscopic visibility. Thus, variables such as these may influence the success of a given stent.^1,2 Hwang and colleagues evaluated the impact of cell design and drug properties on drug delivery using Palmaz-Schatz^® Crown stents (Cordis Corp.) in an in vivo model using bovine carotid arteries and a computational model. The results of their investigations challenged the prevailing view that DES delivered the drug and bathed the artery homogeneously, allowing complete drug delivery and saturation of the entire vessel wall. They found that even at steady-state conditions, sodium fluorescein delivered from the surface of the stent was visible in blood vessels in a pattern that directly represented the stent strut pattern.¹³
       In the large clinical trials, the sirolimus-eluting balloon-expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions (SIRIUS) and the international paclitaxel-eluting NIR^® stent in the treatment of de novo lesions (TAXUS-II), restenotic lesions were frequently located near the stent margins or at the site of a gap between stents (64.5% in SIRIUS; 50.0% in TAXUS-II).^14,15
       Takebayashi and colleagues reported that maximum neointimal hyperplasia (IH) thickness occurred at the site of the maximal interstrut angle in 82% of sirolimus-eluting stents, along with a significant positive correlation between the IH cross-sectional area, IH thickness and the maximum interstrut angle.⁹ In addition, the meta-analysis of the various trials showed patients who received Cypher stents had a 36% reduction in the odds of target lesion revascularization, and a 32% reduction in the odds of angiographic restenosis compared with Taxus stents.⁷
       These results demonstrate the following: (1) nonuniform stent strut distribution, such as a gap between stents and the stent edge, may be associated with a decrease in local drug delivery and may then cause restenosis; (2) the stent-strut configuration directly serves to determine the pattern and degree of drug delivery achieved by the stent; (3) optimal drug delivery requires symmetric expansion of stents with optical axial distribution of struts. Furthermore, factors such as the difference in the mechanism of drug action and the difference in coating materials may influence their local pharmacological effects. Sirolimus is an immunosuppressive drug with anti-inflammatory properties and is regarded as a cytostatic agent, while paclitaxel is an antineoplastic drug and is regarded as a cytotoxic agent.^2,16,17 Although the polymer coating of the sirolimus-eluting stent allows for elution of 100% of the drug, most of which occurs within 1 month, the polymer coating of the paclitaxel-eluting stent allows for elution of only 10% of the drug over 2 months, with 90% of the paclitaxel agent remaining sequestered in the polymer indefinitely.¹⁸
       The present study assigned a focus to the stent design and evaluated them by OCT, which may be approved by FDA in near future. It found that the stent strut distribution of two stents, Cypher and Taxus, the current FDA-approved drug-eluting systems, were significantly different. Although the numbers of visualized stent struts were similar, maximum interstrut angle and the delta mean angle of the Cypher stent were significantly smaller at both cross sections. These results demonstrated that the strut distribution of the Cypher stent was maintained more regularly among these stents. Interestingly, on the Taxus stent, although the change of maximum interstrut angle between the phantom angle 0° and 30° at the max site was minimal, it was larger at the min site. As for the curvature in the range of 0–30°, this range seems the to be the most common among lesions in the “real world” treated by percutaneous coronary intervention procedures. Stents have been categorized as closed-cell stents, open-cell stents and ring stents. Closed-cell stents retain the same area within any given stent cell, regardless of how stretched or compressed the stent becomes in the settings of curvature or lesion eccentricity. Open-cell stents are those in which the area enclosed by a single strut can vary greatly, meaning that the area may be quite small on the inner aspect of a curve, and much larger on the outer aspect of the curve. These characteristics of open-cell stents may have caused the results seen with the Taxus stent. The architectural features of the stent mentioned above may influence procedural deliverability, conformability, procedural success and the rate of restenosis in the BMS era, but no longer will these be the goal of stent design.
       In the DES era, in addition to the physicochemical properties of the drug, geometric characteristics of the delivery device must be considered. Optimization of drug distribution therefore requires symmetric expansion of stents with optical axial distribution of struts.¹³
       From the perspective of stent design, our observations by OCT suggest that stent designs that maintain regular strut distribution, despite expansion in various anatomical circumstances (for example, tortuous segments, bifurcations and ostial locations), will provide the most regular and predictable drug delivery.

Conclusions
       There were significant differences in stent strut distribution between the two current FDA-approved drug-eluting stent systems studied (Cypher and Taxus). This study suggests that the Cypher stent maintains regular strut distribution despite expansion in various anatomical situations and appears to provide more regular and predictable drug delivery.

       Study limitations. Any bench-top testing is intrinsically limited because it can never precisely reproduce in vivo conditions. Unfortunately, we have not yet evaluated clinical cases using OCT.

       Acknowledgements. This study received the support from device manufacturers that donated OCT catheters and stents for testing. We also thank Heidi Bonneau, RN, MS, for her editorial review of this manuscript.

1. Rogers CD. Optimal stent design for drug delivery. Rev Cardiovasc Med 2004;2(Suppl 5):S9–S15.
2. Rogers CD. Drug-eluting stents: Clinical perspectives on drug and design differences. Rev Cardiovasc Med 2005;6(Suppl 1):S3–S12.
3. Goy JJ, Stauffer JC, Siegenthaler M, et al. A prospective randomized comparison between paclitaxel and sirolimus stents in the real world of interventional cardiology: The TAXI trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2005;45:308–311.
4. Dibra A, Kastrati A, Mehilli J, et al. Paclitaxel-eluting or sirolimus-eluting stents to prevent restenosis in diabetic patients. N Engl J Med 2005;353:663–670.
5. Kastrati A, Mehilli J, von Beckerath N, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stent or paclitaxel-eluting stent vs. balloon angioplasty for prevention of recurrences in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2005;293:165–171.
6. Windecker S, Remondino A, Eberli FR, et al. Sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary revascularization. N Engl J Med 2005;353:653–662.
7. Kastrati A, Dibra A, Eberle S, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents vs paclitaxel-eluting stents in patients with coronary artery disease: Meta-analysis of randomized trials. JAMA 2005;294:819–825.
8. Morris M. Eight-month outcome of the REALITY study: A prospective, randomized, multi-center head-to-head comparison of the sirolimus-eluting stent (Cypher) and the paclitaxel-eluting stent (Taxus). Presented at 2005 Scientific Session of the American College of Cardiology.
9. Takebayashi H, Mintz GS, Carlier SG, et al. Nonuniform strut distribution correlates with more neointimal hyperplasia after sirolimus-eluting stent implantation. Circulation 2004;110:3430–3434.
10. Jang IK, Bouma BE, Kang DH, et al. Visualization of coronary atherosclerotic plaques in patients using optical coherence tomography: Comparison with intravascular ultrasound. J Am Coll Cardiol 2002;39:604–609.
11. Bouma BE, Tearney GJ, Yabushita H, et al. Evaluation of intracoronary stenting by intravascular optical coherence tomography. Heart 2003;89:317–320.
12. Yabushita H, Bouma BE, Houser SL, et al. Characterization of human atherosclerosis by optical coherence tomography. Circulation 2002;106:1640–1645.
13. Hwang CW, Wu D, Edelman ER. Physiological transport forces govern drug distribution for stent-based delivery. Circulation 2001;104:600–605.
14. Moses JW, Leon MB, Popma JJ, et al. Sirolimus-eluting stents versus standard stents in patients with stenosis in a native coronary artery. N Engl J Med 2003;349:1315–1323.
15. Colombo A, Drzewiecki J, Banning A, et al. Randomized study to assess the effectiveness of slow- and moderate-release polymer-based paclitaxel-eluting stents for coronary artery lesions. Circulation 2003;108:788–794.
16. Smith EJ, Rothman MT. Antiproliferative coatings for the treatment of coronary heart disease. What are the targets and which are the tools? J Interv Cardiol 2003;16:475–483.
17. Ikeno BL, Willard C, Kopia GA, et al. Sirolimus eluting stents: Pharmacokinetics in blood, vessel, and myocardium in a porcine coronary model. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;43:83A.
18. Perin EC. Choosing a drug-eluting stent: A comparison between CYPHER and TAXUS. Rev Cardiovasc Med 2005;6(Suppl 1):S13–S21.