This invention relates to treatment of atherosclerotic occlusive disease by intravascular procedures for pushing and holding plaque accumulated on the blood vessel walls out of the way for reopened blood flow.
Atherosclerotic occlusive disease is the primary cause of stroke, heart attack, limb loss, and death in the US and the industrialized world. Atherosclerotic plaque forms a hard layer along the wall of an artery and is comprised of calcium, cholesterol, compacted thrombus and cellular debris. As the atherosclerotic disease progresses, the blood supply intended to pass through a specific blood vessel is diminished or even prevented by the occlusive process. One of the most widely utilized methods of treating clinically significant atherosclerotic plaque is balloon angioplasty.
Balloon angioplasty is an accepted method of opening blocked or narrowed blood vessels in every vascular bed in the body. Balloon angioplasty is performed with a balloon angioplasty catheter. The balloon angioplasty catheter consists of a cigar shaped, cylindrical balloon attached to a catheter. The balloon angioplasty catheter is placed into the artery from a remote access site that is created either percutaneously or through open exposure of the artery. The catheter is passed along the inside of the blood vessel over a wire that guides the way of the catheter. The portion of the catheter with the balloon attached is placed at the location of the atherosclerotic plaque that requires treatment. The balloon is inflated to a size that is consistent with the original diameter of the artery prior to developing occlusive disease. When the balloon is inflated, the plaque is broken. Cleavage planes form within the plaque, permitting the plaque to expand in diameter with the expanding balloon. Frequently, a segment of the plaque is more resistant to dilatation than the remainder of the plaque. When this occurs, greater pressure pumped into the balloon results in full dilatation of the balloon to its intended size. The balloon is deflated and removed and the artery segment is reexamined. The process of balloon angioplasty is one of uncontrolled plaque disruption. The lumen of the blood vessel at the site of treatment is usually somewhat larger, but not always and not reliably.
Some of the cleavage planes created by fracture of the plaque with balloon angioplasty form dissection. A dissection occurs when a portion of the plaque is lifted away from the artery and is not fully adherent and may be mobile or loose. The plaque that has been disrupted by dissection protrudes into the flowstream. If the plaque lifts completely in the direction of blood flow, it may impede flow or cause acute occlusion of the blood vessel. There is evidence that dissection after balloon angioplasty must be treated to prevent occlusion and to resolve residual stenosis. There is also evidence that in some circumstances, it is better to place a metal retaining structure, such as stent to hold open the artery after angioplasty and force the dissected material back against the wall of the blood vessel to create an adequate lumen for blood flow.
Therefore, the clinical management of dissection after balloon angioplasty is currently performed primarily with stents. As illustrated in
However, stents have significant disadvantages and much research and development is being done to address these issues. Stents induce repeat narrowing of the treated blood vessel (recurrent stenosis). Recurrent stenosis is the “Achilles heel” of stenting. Depending on the location and the size of the artery, in-growth of intimal hyperplastic tissue from the vessel wall in between struts or through openings in the stent may occur and cause failure of the vascular reconstruction by narrowing or occlusion of the stent. This may occur any time after stent placement. In many cases, the stent itself seems to incite local vessel wall reaction that causes stenosis, even in the segment of the stent that was placed over artery segments that were not particularly narrowed or diseased during the original stent procedure. This reaction of the blood vessel to the presence of the stent is likely due to the scaffolding effect of the stent. This reaction of recurrent stenosis or tissue in growth of the blood vessel is in response to the stent. This activity shows that the extensive use of metal and vessel coverage in the artery as happens with stenting is contributing to the narrowing. The recurrent stenosis is a problem because it causes failure of the stent and there is no effective treatment. Existing treatment methods that have been used for this problem include; repeat angioplasty, cutting balloon angioplasty, cryoplasty, atherectomy, and even repeat stenting. None of these methods have a high degree of long-term success.
Stents may also fracture due to material stress. Stent fracture may occur with chronic material stress and is associated with the development of recurrent stenosis at the site of stent fracture. This is a relatively new finding and it may require specialized stent designs for each application in each vascular bed. Structural integrity of stents remains a current issue for their use. Arteries that are particularly mobile, such as the lower extremity arteries and the carotid arteries, are of particular concern. The integrity of the entire stent is tested any time the vessel bends or is compressed anywhere along the stented segment. One reason why stent fractures may occur is because a longer segment of the artery has been treated than is necessary. The scaffolding effect of the stent affects the overall mechanical behavior of the artery, making the artery less flexible. Available stenting materials have limited bending cycles and are prone to failure at repeated high frequency bending sites.
Many artery segments are stented even when they do not require it, thereby exacerbating the disadvantages of stents. There are several reasons for this. Many cases require more than one stent to be placed and often several are needed. Much of the stent length is often placed over artery segments that do not need stenting and are merely adjoining an area of dissection or disease. Stents that are adjusted to the precise length of the lesion are not available. When one attempts to place multiple stents and in the segments most in need of stenting, the cost is prohibitive since installation and material is required per stent. The time it takes to do this also adds to the cost and risk of the procedure. The more length of artery that receives a stent that it does not need, the more stiffness is conferred to the artery, and the more scaffolding affect occurs. This may also help to incite the arterial reaction to the stent that causes recurrent stenosis.
In accordance with the present invention, a tack device (and related method of deployment) for treating atherosclerotic occlusive disease comprises an annular band of durable, flexible material configured to be radially expandable outwardly under a spring or other expansion force and having a plurality of focal elevating elements on its outer annular periphery. The tack device is inserted in the blood vessel in a compressed state and installed in an expanded state by a catheter delivery mechanism after a balloon angioplasty procedure at one or more specific positions of loose plaque against the blood vessel wall. The focal elevating elements are designed to exert a holding force under expansion force pressure on the plaque while minimizing the amount of material surface area in contact with the plaque or blood vessel wall.
The annular band of the plaque tack has a width in the axial (length) direction of the vessel walls that is about equal to or less than its diameter, in order to minimize the emplacement of foreign scaffolding structure in the blood vessel. One or more tacks are applied only in positions along the length of a plaque accumulation site where specific holding forces are needed to stabilize the site and/or hold pieces of plaque out of the way of blood flow. The focal elevating elements of the tack(s) may be pressed with an expansion force into the plaque and/or vessel walls, for example, by a post-installation balloon expansion procedure.
In the present invention, the plaque tack device is designed as a minimally invasive approach to tacking loose or dissected atherosclerotic plaque to the wall of the artery, as illustrated in
The plaque tack and installation procedure may be designed in a number of ways that share a common methodology of utilizing an expansion force of the delivery mechanism (such as balloon expansion) and/or the expansion force of a compressible annular band to enable the tack to be moved into position in the blood vessel, then released, unfolded or unplied to expand to its full diametral size within the blood vessel walls.
In a preferred embodiment, the tack device comprises a thin, annular band of durable, flexible material having a plurality of focal elevating elements on its outer annular periphery, said annular band being dimensioned and designed to be applied with an expansion force against the plaque to press and hold the plaque at an applied site of said band against the blood vessel walls. Besides stabilizing the emplacement of the tack, the focal elevating elements play a role in tacking the plaque to the blood vessel wall. The annular band has a length in the axial direction of the blood vessel walls that is about equal to or less than its diameter when expanded. In a ring or ribbon-shaped form, the annular band can have a ratio of length to diameter as low as 1/100. The plaque tack device can also have a structure for carrying medication such that it elutes a biologically active agent to the plaque to inhibit growth and/or for treating the blood vessel wall.
For all embodiments an important parameter characterizing design of a plaque tack is the ratio: Vessel Coverage Area (C) to Total Vessel Surface area (TVS), where C/TVS is less than or equal to about 60%. This equation can be applied to one tack device or when several spaced-apart tack devices are placed across the length of a blood vessel treatment area.
In another preferred embodiment, a tack device is formed with concentric side rings or mesh bands connected by longitudinal bridge members. As adapted from a measure of Relative Metal Surface Area (RMS) compared to the number of longitudinal segments in the device structure, an equation for Effective Metallic Interface (EMI) may be used to compare this embodiment of the tack device to a typical stent, as follows:
where x is the number of sections of metal, l is an individual metal section length, w is an individual metal section width, C is the vessel coverage area underneath the device (lumen surface), and n is the number of bridge members longitudinally connected between circumferentially oriented segments. The summation found in the denominator can be interpreted as the total metal surface area. The preferred embodiment of the tack device has an EMI≤10, whereas the EMI of a typical stent would be several times greater.
To further reduce the EMI through the inclusion of lift-off-bump (FEE) features, an improved EMIF can be obtained for the Tack Effective Metal Interface as provided with floating elements (see
where all variables are the same as those in the EMI equation with the addition of lF is an individual metal section length that is not in contact with the artery (floating off the artery), and wF is the width of the same section. If no floating sections exist then nF=0 and lFwF=0 and therefore EMIF=EMI.
The present invention also encompasses the method of using the tack device to treat any plaque dissection in the blood vessel after balloon angioplasty by installing it with an expansion force against the plaque to hold it against the blood vessel walls. One preferred method encompasses one wherein drug eluting balloon angioplasty is first performed, and if there is any damage, disruption, dissection, or irregularity to the blood vessel caused by the balloon angioplasty mechanism, one or more tack devices may be used to tack down the damaged, disrupted, dissected, or irregular blood vessel surface, so as to avoid the need to install a stent and thereby maintain a ‘stent-free’ environment.
Other objects, features, and advantages of the present invention will be explained in the following detailed description of the invention having reference to the appended drawings.
The subject matter of this invention disclosure is directed to the improvement of an annular tack device having focal elevating elements on its annular periphery to minimize surface area contact and reduce friction generated at contact areas between tack device and the blood vessel wall. The improvement of the present invention disclosure is a continuation-in-part of the original disclosure of previous preferred embodiments of an annular tack device having barbs on its annular periphery for holding loose plaque under expansion force against a blood vessel wall. In the following description, the previous preferred embodiments are first described to illustrate specific examples and details of their implementation. A description of preferred embodiments of the improvement of the annular tack device with focal elevating elements then follows.
As illustrated in
The plaque tack and installation procedure may be designed in a number of ways that share a common methodology of utilizing the outward force of a spring-like annular band to enable the tack to be compressed, folded, or plied to take up a small-diameter volume so that it can be moved into position in the blood vessel on a sheath or catheter, then released, unfolded or unplied to expand to its full-diametral size within the blood vessel walls.
In the following description, five general embodiments of the plaque tack device and how to deliver it are explained in detail, referred to as: (1) ribbon tack; (2) folding ring tack; (3) flexible ring tack; (4) spiral coil tack; and (5) metallic mesh tack. All these embodiments are delivered into the blood vessel from endovascular insertion. The delivery device for each involves a delivery apparatus that has some features of a vascular sheath. The delivery device for each is different and has features that are specifically designed to deliver the specific tack
Referring to
In a typical configuration, the ribbon tack may have a width of about 0.1 to 5 mm, a diameter (when curved in annular shape) of about 1 to 10 mm, a length (when extended linearly) of about 3 to 30 mm, and a barb height from 0.01 to 5 mm. In general, the annular band of the plaque tack has a width in the axial direction of the vessel walls that is about equal to or less than its diameter, in order to minimize the amount of foreign structure to be emplaced in the blood vessel. For tack designs in a ring or ribbon shape, the strut width to ring diameter ratio can be in the range of 1/10 to 1/100.
The array of barbs or elevating elements is used for linking the annular band of the tack with the plaque mass or blood vessel wall. The barb is made of a sufficiently rigid material to sustain a locking relationship with the blood vessel tissue and/or to pierce the plaque and maintain a locking relationship therewith. The barb is comprised of a head disposed on a support body. Preferably, the head and support body are integral with each other and are constructed as a single piece. The barb may project at an angle of 90 degrees to the tangent of the annular band, or an acute angle may also be used.
Referring to
Referring to
Referring to
A preferred delivery method for the second described embodiment of the folding ring tack of
The third preferred embodiment of the flexing ring tack of
A fifth embodiment of the previous plaque tack in the form of a metallic mesh tack is illustrated in
A preferred method of delivery for the metallic mesh tack is shown in
A preferred delivery method for the fourth described embodiment of the spiral coil tack of
In the previous embodiments described above, the preferred plaque tack device may be made from Nitinol, silicon composite (with or without an inert coating), polyglycolic acid, or some other superelastic material. The anchors can have a preferred penetration length of 0.01 mm to 5 mm. The strip of material can be created from ribbon, round or rectangular wire or a sheet of material processed through photolithographic processing, laser or water cutting, chemical etching or mechanical removal of the final shape, or the use of bottom up fabrication, for instance chemical vapor deposition processes, or the use of injection modeling, hot embossing, or the use of electro or electroless-plating. It may be fabricated from metal, plastic, ceramic, or composite material.
The plaque tack device is designed to be inherently self-aligning, i.e., its mechanical installation can accommodate small misalignments. By reducing stress in the strut members while gripping the arterial wall in the center of the design, the tack self aligns with the arterial longitudinal axis. Design features that offer stress relief and provide uniform distribution of the unfolding struts include narrow spacing of the barbs, non-uniformly thick struts, and barbs heads that are angled to reduce device from springing forward during delivery. Circumferentially oriented barbs located at each bridge member offer gripping force with the catheter tip and embedding features when lying on the artery wall. These design features serve to facilitate placing the tacks in specific locations within diseased blood vessels. With respect to the piercing barb that has a pointed shape, it can be used to embed in objects having irregular surfaces such as plaque or dissected or damaged artery surfaces. After deployment of the plaque tack, the surgeon has the option of placing an angioplasty balloon at the site of the tack and inflating the balloon to press the anchor or anchors into the wall of the blood vessel.
The purposes of the plaque tack described herein, as distinct from traditional stenting, are to reduce the amount of implanted foreign material to a minimum while still performing focal treatment of the blood vessel condition so as to cause a minimum of blood vessel wall reaction and adverse post-treatment re-stenosis. The preferred plaque tack is designed to have substantially less metal coverage and/or contact with the blood vessel surface, thereby inciting less acute and chronic inflammation. Reduced pressure of implanted material against the blood vessel wall is correlated with a lower incidence of intimal hyperplasia and better long-term patency. Substantially reduced length along the axial distance of the blood vessel permits a more targeted treatment, correlates with less foreign body coverage of the blood vessel surface, avoids covering portions of the surface that are not in need of coverage, and correlates with both early and late improved patency of blood vessel reconstructions. The plaque tack is deployed only where needed to tack down plaque that has been disrupted by balloon angioplasty or other mechanisms. Rather than cover an entire area of treatment, the plaque tack is placed locally and selectively, and not extending into normal or less diseased artery segments. This permits the blood vessel to retain its natural flexibility because there is a minimal to no scaffolding effect when a small profile tack is used locally or when even multiple tacks are spaced apart over the area of treatment. Reduction in the pressure profile is achieved by using “points-of-contact” to achieve higher pressure at focal points and lifting neighboring strut section away from blood vessel wall to reduce the overall load of the outward pressure elsewhere on the tack strut structure.
One parameter for design of a plaque tack is having a tack length to diameter (L/D) ratio about equal to or less than 1. That is, the length of the tack along the axis of the blood vessel is about equal to or less than the diameter of the tack. The preferred plaque tack is thus shaped like an annular ring or band, whereas the typical stent is shaped like an elongated tube. The small-profile tack can thus be used locally for targeted treatment of disrupted regions of the blood vessel surface with a minimum of foreign material coverage or contact. Our tests show that a plaque tack with length/diameter ratio≤1 causes almost no biological reaction or subsequent blood vessel narrowing in comparison to a traditional stent where the length is greater than the diameter, and usually much greater. Our tests indicate that device L/D≤1 results in a reduction in scaffolding much less than that of the typical stent and causes less arterial wall reaction. For application at sites of small dissection after balloon angioplasty, a plaque tack of minimal footprint may be used such as a single, thin ring-type tack with an L/D ratio in the range of 1/10 to 1/100.
Studies on stenting have shown that the length of a stent is correlated with a tendency for occlusion in multiple vascular territories. The more stent length that has been placed, the higher likelihood that the reconstruction will fail. The length of a stent is also directly linked to the frequency and tendency of the stent to break when placed in the superficial femoral artery. The medical literature indicates that the superficial femoral artery performs like a rubber band, and it is likely that changes to the natural elongation and contraction of the superficial femoral artery play a significant role in the failure mode of superficial femoral artery stents. In contrast, the small-profile plaque tack can be implanted only in local areas requiring their use, thereby enabling the blood vessel to retain its natural flexibility to move and bend even after the surface has undergone tacking. Multiple tacks may be implanted separated by regions free of metallic support, thereby leaving the artery free to bend more naturally.
Outward radial pressure exerted on the blood vessel wall can also be substantially reduced by the small-profile tack design, even when multiple tacks are used in a spaced-apart configuration. To minimize this outward force while still providing the required retention of dissections against the arterial wall, a series of anchor barbs is utilized. The presence of the barbs applying focal pressure to the wall of the artery allows the rest of the tack to apply minimum outward force to the artery wall. The points of the barbs which apply the pressure are very focal, and this is where the most force is applied. The focal nature of the application of the pressure exerted by the tack also minimizes the structural effects of the device. The uniformly distributed focal elevating elements provide a distribution of radial energy maximizing the tendency to form a circular lumen.
Another important parameter for design of a plaque tack is the ratio of Vessel Coverage Area (C) to Total Vessel Surface area (TVS). This equation can be applied to one tack device or when several spaced-apart tack devices are placed across the length of a blood vessel treatment area. For a plaque tack, the C/TVS ratio is in the range of about 60% or less, whereas for a stent it can be 100% or more (if applied to overlap the treatment site). For a focal lesion, the conventional treated vessel length is X+10 mm to 20 mm where X is the length of the lesion and the added length is adjoining on normal or less diseased artery proximal or distal to the lesion. In traditional stenting, the entire treated vessel length would be covered with a stent. For example, in the case of a 2 cm lesion, the treated vessel length would be 3 to 4 cm (usually a single stent of this length would be selected), so that C/TVS is 150%-200%. In contrast, with tack placement, about ½ of X would be covered, and none of the adjoining normal or less diseased artery would be treated. For example, in a 2 cm lesion, approximately 1 cm would be covered, so that the C/TVS ratio is about 60% or less. The key to this innovative approach is placement of bands only in regions of dissections requiring arterial tacking.
In another preferred embodiment, a tack device is formed with concentric side rings or mesh bands connected by longitudinal bridge members.
The literature in the industry has noted that an important factor in stent design may be the ratio of Relative Metal Surface Area (RMS) compared to the number of longitudinal segments in the device structure, for example, as presented by Mosseri M, Rozenman Y, Mereuta A, Hasin Y, Gotsman M., “New Indicator for Stent Covering Area”, in Catheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis, 1998, v. 445, pp. 188-192. As adapted from the RMS measure, an equation for Effective Metallic Interface (EMI) may be used to compare the embodiment of the tack device with longitudinal bridging members to a typical stent, as follows:
Becomes:
where x is the number of sections of metal, l is an individual metal section length, w is an individual metal section width, C is the vessel coverage area underneath the device (lumen surface), and n is the number of bridge members longitudinally connected between circumferentially oriented segments. The inclusion of metal sections that are floating (floating length lF, floating width wF, and number of floating bridges nF,) reduces the EMI further which is captured mathematically as a summation with negative variables in the EMIF equation. The summation found in the denominator can be interpreted as the total metal surface area. The embodiment of the tack device with longitudinal bridging members has an EMI≤10, whereas the EMI of a typical stent would be several times greater. This low EMI is due to the nature of the tack design having a small foot-print and minimal longitudinal bridges while a stent typically has a large foot-print and would be a multiple several times that.
When two or more stents need to be employed over an extended length of treatment site, it has been a conventional practice to overlap adjoining stents to prevent kinking between stents. Due to the increased metal lattice, the region of overlap becomes highly rigid and noncompliant. This noncompliance limits the natural arterial flexibility and increases the tendency for restenosis. Stent fractures occur more frequently in the superficial femoral artery where this bending has a high frequency and are common when multiple stents are deployed and overlap. Stent fractures are associated with a higher risk of in-stent restenosis and re-occlusion. In contrast, the plaque tacks are designed to be applied in local areas and not to be overlapped. Optimal spacing is a minimum of 1 tack width apart for tacks. This permits the artery to maintain its flexibility, and only a half or less of the treated length of the artery will be covered with metal.
The presence of the plaque tack outer barbs minimizes the pressure of the overall structure upon the blood vessel wall by transferring regional outward forces to focal pressure points, thereby applying a higher pressure at the focal points and low pressure through the barb contact with the wall. The presence of the barbs applying focal pressure to the wall of the artery allows the rest of the tack to apply minimum outward force to the artery wall. Wherever the barbs are placed, the outward radial energy is maximized at that region, producing a slight outward bowing of the arterial wall. The outward bowing can be used for arterial shaping or molding, for example, 5 or more uniformly distributed focal points can be used to form a circular lumen. Circular lumens offer additional benefit from the standpoint of the vessel wall interaction, independent of the vascular injury.
The use of plaque tack devices can be combined with use of Drug Eluting Balloon (DEB) angioplasty to manage post angioplasty dissection and avoid the need for stents. In DEB angioplasty, a drug-eluting balloon or a drug coated balloon is prepared in a conventional manner. The drug may be one, or a combination, of biologically active agents that are used for various functions, such as anti-thrombotic, anti-mitotic, anti-proliferative, anti-inflammatory, stimulative of healing, or other functions. The DEB is delivered on a guidewire across an area of blockage or narrowing in the blood vessel system. The DEB is inflated to a specific pressure and for a period of time consistent with the manufactures guidelines of use for treatment purposes, as it pertains the drug coating and the intended outcomes, then the DEB is deflated and removed. At this stage the medication from the DEB has been transferred to the wall of the blood vessel. Intravascular imaging by ultrasound is then used to assess the integrity of the artery and the smoothness of the blood vessel surface at the site where the balloon was inflated. The presence of damage along the surface may be indicated as dissection, elevation of plaque, disruption of tissue, irregularity of surface. The plaque tack is used to tack down the damaged, disrupted, dissected, or irregular blood vessel surface. This permits continuation of a ‘stent-free’ environment even if damage to the blood vessel has occurred as a result of balloon angioplasty.
At this stage the medication from the DEB has been transferred to the wall of the blood vessel. Contrast is administered into the blood vessel under fluoroscopic guidance or another method such as intravascular ultrasound is used to assess the integrity of the artery and the smoothness of the blood vessel surface at the site where the balloon was inflated. In some cases, one or more of these completion studies will demonstrate the presence of damage along the surface at the site of the balloon inflation. This damage may include dissection, elevation of plaque, disruption of tissue, irregularity of surface.
The plaque tack delivery catheter is loaded with multiple tacks that may be placed at the discretion of the operator, and advanced over a guidewire in the blood vessel to the location where the dissection or disruption or irregularity has occurred. The location is specifically and carefully identified using angiography. The plaque tack(s) is or are deployed at the location(s) of the lesion. More than one tack may be placed to tack down a major dissection. If more than one tack is placed, it may be placed only according to the rules of proper spacing of tacks. That is, the tack should be at least one tack-length apart and do not overlap. After placement of the tack, it may be further expanded into the wall of the blood vessel using a standard angioplasty balloon or a drug-eluting or drug coated balloon. The purpose of the tack is not to hold the blood vessel lumen open but to tack down the non-smooth or dissected surface of the blood vessel. This ‘touch-up strategy’ permits the resolution of the damage created by the drug-eluting or drug coated balloon without resorting to stent placement and thereby maintaining a ‘stent-free’ environment.
As a further measure, described above, the plaque tack device itself can be used to deliver medication to the blood vessel. In addition to the delivery of medication from the barbs, the tack can be coated with medication prior to tack placement. The purpose of this activity is to permit the tack to elute biologically active agent or agents that have positive effects on the blood vessel.
In the present invention disclosure, the plaque tack devices may be improved by expanding the use of barbs or focal elevating elements on the annular periphery of the device. The use of this new nomenclature is to distinguish the barbs as a feature with greater arterial wall penetration for use as anchors or stabilizers and are preferably placed on struts that connect ring elements, while focal elevating elements are features that may or may not penetrate but still offer regional strut elevation and are preferably placed at apexes of struts or periodically perpendicular to strut lengths. For both barbs and focal elevating elements the size of the interface between the tack and the arterial wall is preferably equal to or shorter than the strut width in at least one direction. The focal elevating elements are similar to barb elements but either do not penetrate or penetrate the tissue only slightly, thereby minimizing the amount of material surface area in contact with the plaque, and offer a set of relief sections for the outward pressure of the tack device adjacent to the focal elevating elements, thereby minimizing the friction generated at the blood vessel wall. The focal elevating elements are formed and configured on the annular periphery of the tack device in a similar manner as described for the previous tack device embodiments and include the addition of raised contact sections in addition to barbs or sharp points. The contact sections can provide improved tacking characteristics in that they increase the outward forces at the contact sections by compressing the plaque at the contact regions and decrease the outward force at the sections neighboring the focal elevating element. This offers regional pressure relief in some sections and increase pressure at the bumps or sharp points collectively offering a reduction in trauma and cellular response of the blood vessel wall.
Because the tack device is held in place by its own pressure exerted on the blood vessel surface, it is susceptible to friction, i.e., slight movement between the device and the vessel surface. Every time the organ moves (e.g., the leg during ambulation), the artery moves. It can be inferred that when the artery moves the working device sitting within the artery also moves but not necessarily every point of contact moves in synch with each other. Whenever there is even a small mismatch between the artery and the device the system rubs against each other promoting cellular reaction and device failure. It has been deduced from experimental data that this rubbing irritates the endothelium causing an inflammatory response. In the present invention, strategically placed focal elevating elements (FEEs) are implemented to reduce the overall regional friction load (thought to be a source of inflammation, cellular proliferation, and the healing response that leads to restenosis) of the area being held open. These raised sections produced by the FEEs limit the histological response of the tissue and the fatigue of the device by limiting the contact between the device and the tissue. Independent of the volume of contact, the tack devices smooth the lumen wall, and allow more natural vessel movement. It is this micro-movement that increases the cellular response of the blood vessel surface to the foreign device.
In configuration on the tack device, the focal elevating elements are designed to reduce effective metal interface (EMI) by minimizing the overall material contact with the blood vessel surface. The focal elevating element (FEE) is preferably configured as a narrow, lifted feature with enough height to penetrate the blood vessel and lift adjacent strut sections of the tack device off from contact with the arterial wall in order to reduce the surface area of foreign material in contact with the arterial wall. Reducing the contact burden is of particular value when the strut members are connecting circumferential rings or circumferentially oriented strut bands. Strut sections in contact with the blood vessel walls can produce microfriction when they move or rub against the blood vessel walls. By reducing the foreign material contact area against the blood vessel wall, the tendency for production of microfriction contact is reduced.
Referring to
The focal elevating elements may be formed as cylindrical, rectangular, spherical, conical, tear dropped, pyramidal, or inclined elements on the annular periphery of the tack device. They can be formed by bending or stamping a section of the tack structure, by an additive process (such as by welding or annealing on a peripheral surface), by a subtractive process (such as by grinding or etching away surrounding material so that the bump element is higher than the surrounding surface, or by modifying small sections of the peripheral surface to be higher than the surrounding surface before or after sheet or tube cutting. For example, one method of modification of small sections of a mesh tack structure is by knotting, twisting, bending or weaving small sections of the wire mesh to produce raised elements from the mesh surface which are the interface with the artery wall of the tack devices.
Properly oriented and symmetrically positioned focal elevating elements can provide foci for expansion force. As the device exerts outward forces and the artery exerts inward forces, the focal elevating elements can be positioned at strategically located positions reducing the outward pressure of strut sections neighboring the focal elevating elements.
Both barbs and focal elevating elements offer strategic advantages that include: the reduction in pressure burden across the tack struts by reducing the contact area and translating the outward forces to the barbs and focal elevating elements, minimizing surface contact which offers a reduction in the tendency of frictional loading driven by micro movement between the arterial wall and the tack strut, and the stabilization of anchoring the tack where the barb or focal elevating element penetrates the vessel wall a fraction of the features height.
Because the tack device is held in place by its own outward force pressure exerted on the plaque and blood vessel surface, it may be susceptible to friction, i.e., slight movement between the device and the vessel surface.
The number and locations of focal elevating elements can affect the overall Relative Metal Surface Area (RMS) which was explained previously. The focal elevating elements may be positioned along the lengths of the tack device surfaces such that a minimal amount of metal surface area is in contact with the artery wall. Focal elevating elements placed at bridges between circumferential strut rings or at the apexes of strut sections of the tack device can offer a majority of arterial injury relief. When focal elevating elements are placed only at apexes and bridges, the RMS of the strut members making up the concentric ring changes a little while the RMS of the bridges is reduced more significantly, due to the narrow length, offering relief of relative motion of the circumferentially oriented strut rings.
Inherent in the use of shape memory alloys for the tack devices is the ability to conform to the shape of the blood vessel walls. Because the focal elevating elements can exert an expansion pressure on the blood vessel walls with a minimal risk of injury, they can be designed to reshape the blood vessel walls to a desired shape.
In summary, the tack device of the present invention is used for plaque retention following balloon angioplasty treatment of atherosclerotic occlusive disease while avoiding problems with the use of stents due to installing a large mass of foreign material in the body which may cause injury, inflammation, and/or provide sites for restenosis. In contrast, the tack device minimizes the material structure and can be installed only at one or more plaque dissection sites that require retention. The improvement of using focal elevating elements on the tack periphery minimizes the contact surface area of the tack device with the blood vessel walls and reduces the risk of causing plaque dissection or injury to the blood vessel walls. This approach offers clinicians the ability to perform a minimally invasive post-angioplasty treatment and produce a stent-like result without using a stent.
It is to be understood that many modifications and variations may be devised given the above description of the principles of the invention. It is intended that all such modifications and variations be considered as within the spirit and scope of this invention, as defined in the following claims.
This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/790,819, filed on May 29, 2010 and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 10,188,533, which is herein incorporated by reference in its entirety and which is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/483,193, filed on Jun. 11, 2009 and issued as U.S. Pat. No. 8,128,677.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3221746 | Noble | Dec 1965 | A |
3635223 | Klieman | Jan 1972 | A |
4292974 | Fogarty et al. | Oct 1981 | A |
4446867 | Leveen et al. | May 1984 | A |
4465072 | Taheri | Aug 1984 | A |
4515587 | Schiff | May 1985 | A |
4545367 | Tucci | Oct 1985 | A |
4545390 | Leary | Oct 1985 | A |
4552127 | Schiff | Nov 1985 | A |
4576591 | Kay et al. | Mar 1986 | A |
4589412 | Kensey | May 1986 | A |
4641654 | Samson et al. | Feb 1987 | A |
4651738 | Demer et al. | Mar 1987 | A |
4687465 | Prindle et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4723550 | Bales et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4723936 | Buchbinder et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4723938 | Goodin et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4726374 | Bales et al. | Feb 1988 | A |
4758223 | Rydell | Jul 1988 | A |
4762130 | Fogarty et al. | Aug 1988 | A |
4781192 | Demer | Nov 1988 | A |
4784636 | Rydell | Nov 1988 | A |
4846174 | Willard et al. | Jul 1989 | A |
4848342 | Kaltenbach | Jul 1989 | A |
RE33166 | Samson | Feb 1990 | E |
5009659 | Hamlin et al. | Apr 1991 | A |
5024668 | Peters et al. | Jun 1991 | A |
5042707 | Taheri | Aug 1991 | A |
5047015 | Foote et al. | Sep 1991 | A |
5102390 | Crittenden et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5196024 | Barath | Mar 1993 | A |
5201757 | Heyn et al. | Apr 1993 | A |
5242452 | Inoue | Sep 1993 | A |
5246420 | Kraus et al. | Sep 1993 | A |
5250029 | Lin et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5250060 | Carbo et al. | Oct 1993 | A |
5263962 | Johnson et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5269758 | Taheri | Dec 1993 | A |
5304121 | Sahatjian | Apr 1994 | A |
5318529 | Kontos | Jun 1994 | A |
5336234 | Virgil et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5344397 | Heaven et al. | Sep 1994 | A |
5383890 | Miraki et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5397305 | Kawula et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5397355 | Marin et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5421955 | Lau et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5423851 | Samuels | Jun 1995 | A |
5423885 | Williams | Jun 1995 | A |
5501689 | Green et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5534007 | St. Germain et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5536252 | Imran et al. | Jul 1996 | A |
5540659 | Teirstein | Jul 1996 | A |
5545135 | Iacob et al. | Aug 1996 | A |
5562728 | Lazarus et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5569272 | Reed et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5571135 | Fraser et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5591197 | Orth et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5593417 | Rhodes | Jan 1997 | A |
5616149 | Barath | Apr 1997 | A |
5634928 | Fischell et al. | Jun 1997 | A |
5643312 | Fischell et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5665116 | Chaisson et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
5681346 | Orth et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5704913 | Abele et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5725572 | Lam et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5728158 | Lau et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5743874 | Fischell et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5746716 | Vigil et al. | May 1998 | A |
5746764 | Green et al. | May 1998 | A |
5776161 | Globerman | Jul 1998 | A |
5797951 | Mueller | Aug 1998 | A |
5800526 | Anderson et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5813977 | Hinchliffe et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5817152 | Birdsall et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5829662 | Allen et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5833694 | Poncet | Nov 1998 | A |
5843033 | Ropiak | Dec 1998 | A |
5911725 | Boury | Jun 1999 | A |
5925061 | Ogi et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5928247 | Barry et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5954742 | Osypka | Sep 1999 | A |
5957949 | Leonhardt et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
5968068 | Dehdashtian et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5968088 | Hansen et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5972023 | Tanner et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5980552 | Pinchasik et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6004328 | Solar | Dec 1999 | A |
6007543 | Ellis et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
6009614 | Morales | Jan 2000 | A |
6013854 | Moriuchi | Jan 2000 | A |
6022374 | Imran | Feb 2000 | A |
6036725 | Avellanet | Mar 2000 | A |
6048360 | Khosravi et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6053941 | Lindenberg et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6053943 | Edwin et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6080177 | Igaki | Jun 2000 | A |
6090135 | Plaia et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6110198 | Fogarty et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6123722 | Fogarty et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6126685 | Lenker et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6129754 | Kanesaka et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6139573 | Sogard et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6143016 | Bleam et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6146358 | Rowe | Nov 2000 | A |
6152937 | Peterson et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6157852 | Selmon et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6165199 | Barbut | Dec 2000 | A |
6187034 | Frantzen | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6197013 | Reed | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6197103 | Davies et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6200336 | Pavcnik et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6203568 | Lombardi et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6203569 | Wijay | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6221102 | Baker et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6241667 | Vetter et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6254628 | Wallace et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6258117 | Camrud et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6266550 | Selmon et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6270524 | Kim | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6273909 | Kugler et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6290728 | Phelps et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6312444 | Barbut | Nov 2001 | B1 |
6312460 | Drasler et al. | Nov 2001 | B2 |
6325824 | Limon | Dec 2001 | B2 |
6331189 | Wolinsky et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6344053 | Boneau | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6364901 | Inoue | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6364904 | Smith | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6371962 | Ellis et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6387113 | Hawkins et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6402777 | Globerman | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6409752 | Boatman et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6409863 | Williams et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6425915 | Khosravi et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6428550 | Vargas et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6428566 | Holt | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6475237 | Drasler et al. | Nov 2002 | B2 |
6485507 | Walak et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6485508 | McGuinness | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6485510 | Camrud et al. | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6491707 | Makower et al. | Dec 2002 | B2 |
6508822 | Peterson et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6517573 | Pollock et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6520984 | Garrison et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6527800 | McGuckin, Jr. et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6547817 | Fischell et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6551353 | Baker et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6599296 | Gillick et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6623521 | Steinke et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
6629994 | Gomez et al. | Oct 2003 | B2 |
6635083 | Cheng et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6648911 | Sirhan et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6660031 | Tran et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6676698 | McGuckin, Jr. et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6692504 | Kurz et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6699274 | Stinson | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6699277 | Freidberg et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6706061 | Fischell et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6716240 | Fischell et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6719775 | Slaker et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6723119 | Pinchasik et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6730116 | Wolinsky et al. | May 2004 | B1 |
6746475 | Rivelli, Jr. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6752828 | Thornton | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6755854 | Gillick et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6786922 | Schaeffer | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6790221 | Monroe et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6790227 | Burgermeister | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6810882 | Langberg et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
6814752 | Chuter | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6827731 | Armstrong et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6843400 | Lee | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6846323 | Yip et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6849087 | Chuter | Feb 2005 | B1 |
6863685 | Davila et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
6896697 | Yip et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6899718 | Gifford, III et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6899914 | Schaldach et al. | May 2005 | B2 |
6913600 | Valley et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6942680 | Grayzel et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6942689 | Majercak | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6945992 | Goodson, IV et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6951554 | Johansen et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6986784 | Weiser et al. | Jan 2006 | B1 |
6989021 | Bosma et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7001422 | Escamilla et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7001424 | Patel et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7007698 | Thornton | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7018402 | Vito et al. | Mar 2006 | B2 |
7025791 | Levine et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7037330 | Rivelli, Jr. et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7041130 | Santini, Jr. et al. | May 2006 | B2 |
7052511 | Weldon | May 2006 | B2 |
7087088 | Berg et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7105016 | Shiu et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7122043 | Greenhalgh et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7137993 | Acosta et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7147655 | Chermoni | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7147656 | Andreas et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7147661 | Chobotov et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7150745 | Stern et al. | Dec 2006 | B2 |
7160312 | Saadat | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7163552 | Diaz | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7166125 | Baker et al. | Jan 2007 | B1 |
7169158 | Sniffin et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7169163 | Becker | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7175654 | Bonsignore et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7179284 | Khosravi et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7182779 | Acosta et al. | Feb 2007 | B2 |
7192440 | Andreas et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7201770 | Johnson et al. | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7208002 | Shelso | Apr 2007 | B2 |
7211101 | Carley et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7243408 | Vietmeier | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7258697 | Cox et al. | Aug 2007 | B1 |
7261731 | Patel et al. | Aug 2007 | B2 |
7267684 | Rolando et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7270668 | Andreas et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7270673 | Yee et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7273492 | Cheng et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7279007 | Nikolic et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7294146 | Chew et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7296577 | Lashinski et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7300456 | Andreas et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7303572 | Meisheimer et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7306617 | Majercak | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7309341 | Ortiz et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7309350 | Landreville et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7309353 | Krivoruchko | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7316711 | Allen et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7320702 | Hammersmark et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7323006 | Andreas et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7323007 | Sano | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7326236 | Andreas et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7329279 | Haug et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7331987 | Cox | Feb 2008 | B1 |
7331990 | Gianotti | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7331992 | Randall et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
7351255 | Andreas | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7399307 | Evans et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7402168 | Sanderson et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7431729 | Chanduszko | Oct 2008 | B2 |
7445631 | Salaheih et al. | Nov 2008 | B2 |
7476245 | Abbate | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7479158 | Gregorich | Jan 2009 | B2 |
7500986 | Lye et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7510575 | Spenser et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7524330 | Berreklouw | Apr 2009 | B2 |
7537607 | Gerberding | May 2009 | B2 |
7553324 | Andreas et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7556647 | Drews et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7578840 | Schaeffer | Aug 2009 | B2 |
7591848 | Allen | Sep 2009 | B2 |
7604662 | Cambronne et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7617007 | Williams et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7618432 | Pedersen et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7618447 | Case et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7625399 | Case et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7628803 | Pavcnik et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7637935 | Pappas et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7655033 | Fearnot et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7655034 | Mitchell et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7658759 | Case et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7666216 | Hogendijk et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
7686824 | Konstantino et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7686843 | Moore | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7695507 | Rivelli, Jr. et al. | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7720521 | Chang et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7736387 | Pollock et al. | Jun 2010 | B2 |
7758594 | Lamson et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7758627 | Richter | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7758632 | Hojeibane et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7763063 | Arbefeuille et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7806918 | Nissl et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7810223 | Hemerick et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7828834 | Garbe | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7833262 | McGuckin, Jr. et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7842080 | Chouinard | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7846194 | Hartley et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7867267 | Sullivan et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7871431 | Gurm et al. | Jan 2011 | B2 |
7883537 | Grayzel et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
7896911 | Schneider et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7905913 | Chew et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7922755 | Acosta et al. | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7933660 | Carr | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7942920 | Majercak | May 2011 | B2 |
7955315 | Feinberg et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7963987 | Melsheimer et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7967855 | Furst et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7971333 | Gale et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7972373 | Contiliano et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7981149 | Contiliano et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
7993383 | Hartley et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8002725 | Hogendijk | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8016870 | Chew et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8024851 | Barr et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8034099 | Pellegrini | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8043354 | Greenberg et al. | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8043357 | Hartley | Oct 2011 | B2 |
8048151 | O'Brien et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8052738 | Craven | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8057543 | O'Brien et al. | Nov 2011 | B2 |
8092468 | Hansen | Jan 2012 | B2 |
8127422 | Wu | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8128677 | Schneider et al. | Mar 2012 | B2 |
8157851 | Andreas | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8157857 | Case et al. | Apr 2012 | B2 |
8177831 | Andreas | May 2012 | B2 |
8221489 | Issenmann et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8236044 | Robaina | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8236045 | Benichou et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8292938 | Case | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8308790 | Arbefeuille et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8317859 | Snow et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
8323243 | Schneider et al. | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8328864 | Niermann | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8353945 | Andreas et al. | Jan 2013 | B2 |
8366766 | Berreklouw | Feb 2013 | B2 |
8394139 | Roeder et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8403978 | Schlun et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8414636 | Nabulsi et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8414637 | Chouinard | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8460357 | McGarry et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8474460 | Barrett et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8486132 | Snow et al. | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8496698 | Abunassar | Jul 2013 | B2 |
8500787 | Simpson et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8500789 | Wuebbeling et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8523935 | Fliedner | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8540760 | Paul, Jr. et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
8585747 | Andreas et al. | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8636793 | Hoerstrup et al. | Jan 2014 | B2 |
8641755 | Davis et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8652198 | Andreas et al. | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8663310 | Greenberg et al. | Mar 2014 | B2 |
8734502 | Orr | May 2014 | B2 |
8740973 | Furst et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8745842 | Wu | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8771335 | Griego et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8778010 | Venturelli et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8784467 | Connelly et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8834556 | Papp et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
8864811 | Kao | Oct 2014 | B2 |
8888841 | Pandelidis et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8900289 | Thompson | Dec 2014 | B2 |
8926689 | Bogert | Jan 2015 | B2 |
8956398 | George et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
8961583 | Hojeibane et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
8966736 | Wu | Mar 2015 | B2 |
8986362 | Snow et al. | Mar 2015 | B2 |
9005265 | Lootz et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9005274 | Seguin et al. | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9050181 | Hartley | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9056351 | Krivoruchko et al. | Jun 2015 | B2 |
9095461 | Schaeffer | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9101500 | Feld et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9101503 | Lowe et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9113999 | Taylor et al. | Aug 2015 | B2 |
9192492 | Seguin et al. | Nov 2015 | B2 |
9216082 | Von Segesser et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9237959 | Cage | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9241702 | Maisano et al. | Jan 2016 | B2 |
9301864 | Kao | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9314327 | Orr | Apr 2016 | B2 |
9339404 | Snow et al. | May 2016 | B2 |
9345597 | Pacetti | May 2016 | B2 |
9364350 | Pacetti et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9370437 | Chuter et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9375327 | Giasolli et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9398967 | Cornelius | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9408731 | Hartley et al. | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9427340 | Yadin | Aug 2016 | B2 |
9452067 | Wu | Sep 2016 | B2 |
9480826 | Schneider et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9498296 | Hingston et al. | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9498322 | Thomas | Nov 2016 | B2 |
9545322 | Schneider et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
9585777 | Pacetti | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9603696 | Hartley et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9603730 | Giasolli et al. | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9603980 | Zhao | Mar 2017 | B2 |
9662231 | Ngo et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9668892 | Shalev et al. | Jun 2017 | B2 |
9700448 | Snow et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9707115 | Masakazu | Jul 2017 | B2 |
9730818 | Giasolli et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9737368 | Lumauig | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9895243 | Kariniemi et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
9908297 | Pacetti et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9918835 | Guyenot et al. | Mar 2018 | B2 |
9943428 | Burkart et al. | Apr 2018 | B2 |
9974670 | Schneider et al. | May 2018 | B2 |
9987154 | Pacetti et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
10022250 | Giasolli et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10098764 | Pacetti | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10111741 | Michalak | Oct 2018 | B2 |
10117762 | Giasolli et al. | Nov 2018 | B2 |
10137013 | Giasolli et al. | Nov 2018 | B2 |
10166127 | Giasolli et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10188533 | Schneider et al. | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10231853 | Weber | Mar 2019 | B2 |
10231854 | Wack | Mar 2019 | B2 |
10238339 | Dlugach et al. | Mar 2019 | B2 |
10245167 | Longo | Apr 2019 | B2 |
10245168 | Amendt et al. | Apr 2019 | B2 |
10271973 | Giasolli et al. | Apr 2019 | B2 |
10278839 | Giasolli et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
10285831 | Giasolli et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
10292845 | Higashi et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
10299945 | Schneider et al. | May 2019 | B2 |
10390977 | Giasolli et al. | Aug 2019 | B2 |
10660771 | Giasolli et al. | May 2020 | B2 |
20020120323 | Thompson | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020123790 | White et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020165599 | Nasralla | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020169495 | Gifford et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030055491 | Schwartz | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030069630 | Burgermeister et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030130720 | DePalma et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030220683 | Minasian et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030225446 | Hartley | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030225448 | Gerberding | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040010307 | Grad et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
20040186551 | Kao et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040215324 | Vonderwalde et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040267348 | Gunderson et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010275 | Sahatjian et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050096731 | Looi et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050149163 | Sahota | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050246008 | Hogendijk et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050251164 | Gifford, III et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050278011 | Peckham | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288764 | Snow et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050288766 | Plain et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060069424 | Acosta et al. | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060074478 | Feller, III | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060111769 | Murray | May 2006 | A1 |
20060184225 | Pryor | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060184227 | Rust | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060206190 | Chermoni | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060248698 | Hanson et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060282149 | Kao | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070088420 | Andreas et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070093744 | Elmaleh | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070156223 | Vaughan | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070156225 | George et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070156226 | Chew et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070179587 | Acosta et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070191926 | Nikanorov et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070239273 | Allen | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080033522 | Grewe et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080051867 | Davila et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080077229 | Andres et al. | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080082154 | Tseng et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080132999 | Mericle et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
20080188207 | Lee | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080208327 | Rowe | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080221658 | Martin et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080255653 | Schkolnik | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080264102 | Berra | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080269865 | Snow et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080319528 | Yribarren et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090076594 | Sabaria | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090082841 | Zacharias et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090149943 | Tower | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090216284 | Chin et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
20090248141 | Shandas et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090270965 | Sinha et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090270967 | Fleming, III et al. | Oct 2009 | A1 |
20090276031 | Kao | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100131045 | Globerman et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100137966 | Magnuson | Jun 2010 | A1 |
20100228333 | Drasler et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100318173 | Kolandaivelu et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110077731 | Lee et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110230954 | Schneider et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20120016457 | Chobotov et al. | Jan 2012 | A1 |
20120065722 | Pacetti | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120191176 | Nagl et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120283811 | Neilan | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20140194967 | Schneider et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140288629 | Amendt | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20160192942 | Strauss et al. | Jul 2016 | A1 |
20160242943 | Riedy et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20170000629 | Giasolli et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170181873 | Schneider et al. | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20170231751 | Barthold et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170281375 | Longo et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170296366 | Giasolli et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170319364 | Jung et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20170367856 | Tanaka et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180028306 | Gonzalez et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
20180154123 | Werneth et al. | Jun 2018 | A1 |
20180200085 | Giasolli et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180200086 | Giasolli et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180200087 | Giasolli et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180207008 | Giasolli et al. | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180272044 | Hossainy et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20180303640 | Schneider et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180318116 | Eli et al. | Nov 2018 | A1 |
20190069985 | Nennig et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190070025 | Fu et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190192319 | Giasolli et al. | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190282381 | Giasolli et al. | Sep 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2008335140 | Nov 2012 | AU |
2011274392 | Nov 2013 | AU |
2014201067 | Mar 2014 | AU |
2010259907 | Aug 2015 | AU |
2013212056 | Jul 2016 | AU |
2015207895 | May 2017 | AU |
2014280976 | Jul 2017 | AU |
2705275 | Jul 2013 | CA |
1856280 | Nov 2006 | CN |
101102728 | Jan 2008 | CN |
101262835 | Sep 2008 | CN |
101754727 | Jun 2010 | CN |
101909552 | Dec 2010 | CN |
102292036 | Dec 2011 | CN |
102724931 | Oct 2012 | CN |
103313682 | Aug 2016 | CN |
104220026 | Sep 2016 | CN |
106466205 | Mar 2017 | CN |
106473786 | Mar 2017 | CN |
106473849 | Mar 2017 | CN |
107028691 | Aug 2017 | CN |
107157632 | Sep 2017 | CN |
107205834 | Sep 2017 | CN |
104887365 | Dec 2017 | CN |
60030705 | May 2007 | DE |
10 2009 041 025 | Mar 2011 | DE |
20 2011 107 781 | Dec 2011 | DE |
20 2011 110 714 | Dec 2015 | DE |
10 2014 016 588 | May 2016 | DE |
20 2011 110 818 | Sep 2016 | DE |
2775968 | Dec 2017 | DK |
0497620 | Aug 1992 | EP |
0714640 | Jun 1996 | EP |
0855883 | Aug 1998 | EP |
0812580 | Feb 2004 | EP |
1393766 | Mar 2004 | EP |
1236446 | Aug 2005 | EP |
1803423 | Jul 2007 | EP |
1894545 | Mar 2008 | EP |
1452151 | Oct 2008 | EP |
1567093 | Jan 2009 | EP |
1378212 | Sep 2009 | EP |
2219535 | Aug 2010 | EP |
2440155 | Apr 2012 | EP |
1729682 | Apr 2013 | EP |
1786367 | Apr 2013 | EP |
1973502 | Apr 2014 | EP |
2806826 | Dec 2014 | EP |
2881086 | Jun 2015 | EP |
2699207 | Oct 2015 | EP |
2590602 | Dec 2015 | EP |
3015078 | May 2016 | EP |
3058900 | Aug 2016 | EP |
1689327 | Sep 2016 | EP |
3072463 | Sep 2016 | EP |
2775968 | Sep 2017 | EP |
3217927 | Sep 2017 | EP |
2967830 | Nov 2017 | EP |
3421010 | Jan 2019 | EP |
2714816 | Jul 1995 | FR |
201106757 | Jun 2011 | GB |
H06-000221 | Jan 1994 | JP |
H08-332229 | Dec 1996 | JP |
H11-501526 | Feb 1999 | JP |
H11-506665 | Jun 1999 | JP |
2007-503923 | Mar 2007 | JP |
2008-504078 | Feb 2008 | JP |
2008-246214 | Oct 2008 | JP |
2008-537891 | Oct 2008 | JP |
2010-516333 | May 2010 | JP |
2016-135278 | Jul 2016 | JP |
6006808 | Oct 2016 | JP |
10-2017-0084214 | Jul 2017 | KR |
WO 1996002211 | Feb 1996 | WO |
WO 1996009013 | Mar 1996 | WO |
WO 1996037167 | Nov 1996 | WO |
WO 1999048440 | Sep 1999 | WO |
WO 1999049440 | Sep 1999 | WO |
WO 2000066034 | Nov 2000 | WO |
WO 2001076509 | Oct 2001 | WO |
WO 2002034163 | May 2002 | WO |
WO 2003047651 | Jun 2003 | WO |
WO 2003101310 | Dec 2003 | WO |
WO 2004006983 | Jan 2004 | WO |
WO 2004032799 | Apr 2004 | WO |
WO 2006005082 | Jan 2006 | WO |
WO 2006026371 | Mar 2006 | WO |
WO 2007088549 | Aug 2007 | WO |
WO 2007109621 | Sep 2007 | WO |
WO 2009076517 | Jun 2009 | WO |
WO 2010037141 | Apr 2010 | WO |
WO 2010118432 | Oct 2010 | WO |
WO 2010144845 | Dec 2010 | WO |
WO 2011153110 | Dec 2011 | WO |
WO 2012006602 | Jan 2012 | WO |
WO 2012143731 | Oct 2012 | WO |
WO 2013068127 | May 2013 | WO |
WO 2013112768 | Aug 2013 | WO |
WO 2016074799 | May 2016 | WO |
WO 2018175048 | Sep 2018 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Bosiers, M. et al., “Results from the Tack Optimized Balloon Angioplasty (TOBA) study demonstrate the benefits of minimal metal implants for dissection repair after angioplasty”, Journal of Vascular Surgery, vol. 64, Jul. 2016, in 8 pages. |
Colombo, A. et al., “Intravascular Ultrasound-Guided Percutaneous Transluminal Coronary Angioplasty With Provisional Spot Stenting for Treatment of Long Coronary Lesions”, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 38, No. 5, Nov. 1, 2001, in 9 pages. |
Kokkinidis, D. et al., “Emerging and Future Therapeutic Options for Femoropopliteal and Infrapopliteal Endovascular Intervention”, Interventional Cardiology Clinics, vol. 6, 2017, in 17 pages. |
Mosseri, M. et al., “New Indicator for Stent Covering Area”, in Catheterization and Cardiovascular Diagnosis, 1998, vol. 44, in 5 pages. |
Shishehbor, M. et al., “Endovascular Treatment of Femoropopliteal Lesions”, Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 66, 2015, in 4 pages. |
Zeller, T. et al., “Novel Approaches to the Management of Advanced Peripheral Artery Disease: Perspectives on Drug-Coated Balloons, Drug-Eluting Stents, and Bioresorbable Scaffolds”, Current Cardiology Reports, vol. 17, Sep. 2015, in 6 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion, re PCT Application No. PCT/US2010/038379, dated Feb. 25, 2011. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion, re PCT Application No. PCT/US2011/038468, dated Jan. 18, 2012. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion, re PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/023030, dated Apr. 16, 2013. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion, re PCT Application PCT/US2008/086396, dated Jul. 27, 2009. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion, re PCT Application PCT/US2011/043471, dated Feb. 9, 2012. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/984,111, filed May 18, 2018, Method of Treating Atherosclerotic Occlusive Disease. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,464, filed Mar. 14, 2018, Deployment Device for Placement of Multiple Intraluminal Surgical Staples. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/170,772, filed Jun. 1, 2016, Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,448, filed Mar. 14, 2018, Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,459, filed Mar. 14, 2018, Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,477, filed Mar. 14, 2018, Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,541 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,166,127), filed Mar. 14, 2018 (0/01/2019), Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/415,167, filed Jan. 25, 2017, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/227,757, filed Aug. 3, 2016, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/705,793 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,245,167), filed Sep. 15, 2017 (Apr. 2, 2019), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 11/955,331 (U.S. Pat. No. 7,896,911), filed Dec. 12, 2007 (Mar. 1, 2011), Device and Method for Tacking Plaque to Blood Vessel Wall. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/038,175 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,545,322), filed Mar. 1, 2011 (Jan. 17, 2017), Device and Method for Tacking Plaque to Blood Vessel Wall. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/375,026, filed Dec. 9, 2016, Device and Method for Tacking Plaque to Blood Vessel Wall. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/998,168, filed Aug. 20, 2020, Device and Method for Tacking Plaque to Blood Vessel Wall. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/483,193 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,128,677), filed Jun. 11, 2009 (Mar. 6, 2012), Device and Method for Tacking Plaque to a Blood Vessel Wall. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/246,776 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,974,670), filed Sep. 27, 2011 (May 22, 2018), Method of Treating Atherosclerotic Occlusive Disease. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/984,111 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,299,945), filed May 18, 2018 (May 28, 2019), Method of Treating Atherosclerotic Occlusive Disease. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/102,411, filed Dec. 10, 2013, Method of Treating Atherosclerotic Occlusive Disease. |
U.S. Appl. No. 12/790,819 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,188,533), filed May 29, 2010 (Jan. 29, 2019), Minimal Surface Area Contact Device for Holding Plaque to Blood Vessel Wall. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/118,388, filed May 28, 2011, Stent Device Having Focal Elevating Elements for Minimal Surface Area Contact With Lumen Walls. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/179,458 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,022,250), filed Jul. 8, 2011 (Jul. 17, 2018), Deployment Device for Placement of Multiple Intraluminal Surgical Staples. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/815,515, filed Nov. 16, 2017, Deployment Device for Placement of Multiple Intraluminal Surgical Staples. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,464 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,660,771), filed Mar. 14, 2018 (May 26, 2020), Deployment Device for Placement of Multiple Intraluminal Surgical Staples. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/881,385, filed May 22, 2020, Deployment Device for Placement of Multiple Intraluminal Surgical Staples. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/153,257 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,375,327), filed Jun. 3, 2011 (Jun. 28, 2016), Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/170,772 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,278,839), filed Jun. 1, 2016 (May 7, 2019), Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/640,095, filed Jun. 30, 2017, Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,448 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,285,831), filed Mar. 14, 2018 (May 14, 2019), Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,459 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,390,977), filed Mar. 14, 2018 (Aug. 27, 2019), Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,477 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,271,973), filed Mar. 14, 2018 (Apr. 30, 2019), Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/426,627, filed May 30, 2019, Endovascular Implant and Deployment Devices. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/998,190, filed Aug. 20, 2020, Endovascular Implant. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/749,643 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,730,818), filed Jan. 24, 2013 (Aug. 15, 2017), Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/089,703 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,603,730), filed Nov. 25, 2013 (Mar. 28, 2017), Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/472,215, filed Mar. 28, 2017, Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/654,586 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,117,762), filed Jul. 19, 2017 (Nov. 6, 2018), Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/837,870 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,137,013), filed Dec. 11, 2017 (Nov. 27, 2018), Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/921,541 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,166,127), filed Mar. 14, 2018 (Jan. 1, 2019), Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/225,528, filed Dec. 19, 2018, Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/998,196, filed Aug. 20, 2020, Endoluminal Device and Method. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/939,019, filed Jul. 10, 2013, Systems and Methods for Attaching Radiopaque Markers to a Medical Device. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/746,636 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,192,500), filed Jun. 22, 2015 (Nov. 24, 2015), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/885,295 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,375,337), filed Oct. 16, 2015 (Jun. 28, 2016), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/133,709, filed Apr. 20, 2016, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/935,087 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,345,603), filed Nov. 6, 2015 (May 24, 2016), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/133,751 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,602,786), filed Apr. 20, 2016 (Mar. 21, 2017), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/935,121 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,320,632), filed Nov. 6, 2015 (Apr. 26, 2016), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/133,158 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,584,777), filed Apr. 19, 2016 (Feb. 28, 2017), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/011,321 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,456,914), filed Jan. 29, 2016 (Oct. 4, 2016), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/134,315 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,585,782), filed Apr. 20, 2016 (Mar. 7, 2017), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/415,167 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,610,392), filed Jan. 25, 2017 (Apr. 7, 2020), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/821,578, filed Mar. 17, 2020, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/656,462 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,375,336), filed Mar. 12, 2015 (Jun. 28, 2016), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/935,154 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,445,929), filed Nov. 6, 2015 (Sep. 20, 2016), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/194,410, filed Jun. 27, 2016, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/000,437 (U.S. Pat. No. 9,433,520), filed Jan. 19, 2016 (Sep. 6, 2016), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/227,757 (U.S. Pat. No. 10,245,167), filed Aug. 3, 2016 (Apr. 2, 2019), Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/372,224, filed Apr. 1, 2019, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/067,082, filed Jun. 28, 2018, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/705,793, filed Sep. 15, 2017, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/632,841, filed Jan. 21, 2020, Delivery Device and Method of Delivery. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20190192321 A1 | Jun 2019 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12790819 | May 2010 | US |
Child | 16259146 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12483193 | Jun 2009 | US |
Child | 12790819 | US |