| Title |
Novel A20-gene-eluting stent inhibits carotid artery restenosis in a porcine model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s94984 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zhen-hua Zhou, Jing Peng, Zhao-you Meng, Lin Chen, Jia-Lu Huang, He-qing Huang, Li Li, Wen Zeng, Yong Wei, Chu-Hong Zhu, Kang-Ning Chen |
| Abstract |
Carotid artery stenosis is a major risk factor for ischemic stroke. Although carotid angioplasty and stenting using an embolic protection device has been introduced as a less invasive carotid revascularization approach, in-stent restenosis limits its long-term efficacy and safety. The objective of this study was to test the anti-restenosis effects of local stent-mediated delivery of the A20 gene in a porcine carotid artery model. The pCDNA3.1EHA20 was firmly attached onto stents that had been collagen coated and treated with N-succinimidyl-3-(2-pyridyldithiol)propionate solution and anti-DNA immunoglobulin fixation. Anti-restenosis effects of modified vs control (the bare-metal stent and pCDNA3.1 void vector) stents were assessed by Western blot and scanning electron microscopy, as well as by morphological and inflammatory reaction analyses. Stent-delivered A20 gene was locally expressed in porcine carotids in association with significantly greater extent of re-endothelialization at day 14 and of neointimal hyperplasia inhibition at 3 months than stenting without A20 gene expression. The A20-gene-eluting stent inhibits neointimal hyperplasia while promoting re-endothelialization and therefore constitutes a novel potential alternative to prevent restenosis while minimizing complications. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 14 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 14 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 21% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 14% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 14% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 14% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 7% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 14% |
| Unknown | 4 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. 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 02 April 2017.
All research outputs
#3,222,028
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#180
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#56,597
of 381,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#5
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 381,036 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.