Implantable medical devices fabricated from branched polymers

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 8486135
  • Patent Number
    8,486,135
  • Date Filed
    Monday, April 9, 2007
    17 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, July 16, 2013
    11 years ago
Abstract
This invention relates to implantable medical devices, such as stents, fabricated from hyperbranched-like polymers, comb-like polymers, star polymers, dendrimer-like star polymers, dendrimers, and mixtures thereof.
Description
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

1. Field of the Invention


This invention relates to implantable medical devices fabricated from polymer blends including branched polymers.


2. Description of the State of the Art


This invention relates to radially expandable endoprostheses, which are adapted to be implanted in a bodily lumen. An “endoprosthesis” corresponds to an artificial device that is placed inside the body. A “lumen” refers to a cavity of a tubular organ such as a blood vessel.


A stent is an example of such an endoprosthesis. Stents are generally cylindrically shaped devices, which function to hold open and sometimes expand a segment of a blood vessel or other anatomical lumen such as urinary tracts and bile ducts. Stents are often used in the treatment of atherosclerotic stenosis in blood vessels. “Stenosis” refers to a narrowing or constriction of the diameter of a bodily passage or orifice. In such treatments, stents reinforce body vessels and prevent restenosis following angioplasty in the vascular system. “Restenosis” refers to the reoccurrence of stenosis in a blood vessel or heart valve after it has been treated (as by balloon angioplasty, stenting, or valvuloplasty) with apparent success.


The treatment of a diseased site or lesion with a stent involves both delivery and deployment of the stent. “Delivery” refers to introducing and transporting the stent through a bodily lumen to a region, such as a lesion, in a vessel that requires treatment. “Deployment” corresponds to the expanding of the stent within the lumen at the treatment region. Delivery and deployment of a stent are accomplished by positioning the stent about one end of a catheter, inserting the end of the catheter through the skin into a bodily lumen, advancing the catheter in the bodily lumen to a desired treatment location, expanding the stent at the treatment location, and removing the catheter from the lumen.


In the case of a balloon expandable stent, the stent is mounted about a balloon disposed on the catheter. Mounting the stent typically involves compressing or crimping the stent onto the balloon. The stent is then expanded by inflating the balloon. The balloon may then be deflated and the catheter withdrawn. In the case of a self-expanding stent, the stent may be secured to the catheter via a constraining member such as a retractable sheath or a sock. When the stent is in a desired bodily location, the sheath may be withdrawn which allows the stent to self-expand.


The stent must be able to satisfy a number of mechanical requirements. First, the stent must be capable of withstanding the structural loads, namely radial compressive forces, imposed on the stent as it supports the walls of a vessel. Therefore, a stent must possess adequate radial strength. Radial strength, which is the ability of a stent to resist radial compressive forces, is due to strength and rigidity around a circumferential direction of the stent. Radial strength and rigidity, therefore, may also be described as, hoop or circumferential strength and rigidity.


Once expanded, the stent must adequately maintain its size and shape throughout its service life despite the various forces that may come to bear on it, including the cyclic loading induced by the beating heart. For example, a radially directed force may tend to cause a stent to recoil inward. Generally, it is desirable to minimize recoil. In addition, the stent must possess sufficient flexibility to allow for crimping, expansion, and cyclic loading. Longitudinal flexibility is important to allow the stent to be maneuvered through a tortuous vascular path and to enable it to conform to a deployment site that may not be linear or may be subject to flexure. Finally, the stent must be biocompatible so as not to trigger any adverse vascular responses.


The structure of a stent is typically composed of scaffolding that includes a pattern or network of interconnecting structural elements often referred to in the art as struts or bar arms. The scaffolding can be formed from wires, tubes, or sheets of material rolled into a cylindrical shape. The scaffolding is designed so that the stent can be radially compressed (to allow crimping) and radially expanded (to allow deployment). A conventional stent is allowed to expand and contract through movement of individual structural elements of a pattern with respect to each other.


Additionally, a medicated stent may be fabricated by coating the surface of either a metallic or polymeric scaffolding with a polymeric carrier that includes an active or bioactive agent or drug. Polymeric scaffolding may also serve as a carrier of an active agent or drug.


Furthermore, it may be desirable for a stent to be biodegradable. In many treatment applications, the presence of a stent in a body may be necessary for a limited period of time until its intended function of, for example, maintaining vascular patency and/or drug delivery is accomplished. Therefore, stents fabricated from biodegradable, bioabsorbable, and/or bioerodible materials such as bioabsorbable polymers should be configured to completely erode only after the clinical need for them has ended.


Potential problems with polymeric implantable medical devices, such as stents, include insufficient toughness, slow degradation rate, and limited shelf life due to physical aging and stress relaxation.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Various embodiments of the present invention include a stent fabricated at least in part from a polymeric material comprising a branched biodegradable polymer, the structure of the branched biodegradable polymer selected from the group consisting of hyperbranched-like polymers, comb-like polymers, star polymers, dendrimer-like star polymers, dendrimers, or any mixture thereof in any proportion.


Further embodiments of the present invention include a stent fabricated from a polymeric material comprising an unbranched biodegradable polymer blended with a branched biodegradable polymer, wherein a majority of the polymeric material comprises the unbranched polymer.


Additional embodiments of the present invention include an implantable medical device fabricated from a polymeric material, the polymeric material comprising a polymer blend including: a matrix polymer blended with star-block copolymers having at least three arms, wherein the arms include inner segments and outer segments, the inner segments forming a discrete phase within a continuous phase, the continuous phase including the matrix polymer and the outer segments.


Other embodiments of the present invention include a method of fabricating an implantable medical device comprising: forming star-block copolymers having at least three arms, wherein the arms include inner segments and outer segments; blending a matrix polymer with the star-block copolymers, wherein the blend comprises discrete phase regions dispersed within the continuous phase, the continuous phase comprising the matrix polymer and the outer segments, the discrete phase regions comprising the inner segments; and fabricating an implantable medical device from the blend.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS


FIG. 1A depicts a view of a stent.



FIG. 1B depicts a section of a structural element from the stent depicted in FIG. 1A.



FIG. 2 depicts a schematic close-up view of the section depicted in FIG. 1B.



FIG. 3 depicts a star-block copolymer having four arms.



FIG. 4 depicts a schematic close-up view of a discrete polymer phase dispersed within a continuous polymer phase.



FIG. 5 depicts a synthesis scheme of a star-block copolymer.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

Various embodiments of the present invention include an implantable medical device fabricated from a polymeric material including branched structured polymers. Certain embodiments include an implantable medical device fabricated from a polymer blend of a matrix polymer and a star-block copolymer, which includes a discrete polymer phase within a continuous phase.


As used herein, an “implantable medical device” includes, but is not limited to, self-expandable stents, balloon-expandable stents, stent-grafts, other expandable tubular devices for various bodily lumen or orifices, implantable cardiac pacemakers and defibrillators, leads and electrodes for the preceding, vascular grafts, grafts, artificial heart valves, and cerebrospinal fluid shunts. An implantable medical device can be designed for the localized delivery of a therapeutic agent. A medicated implantable medical device may be constructed by coating the device or substrate with a coating material containing a therapeutic agent. The substrate of the device may also contain a therapeutic agent.



FIG. 1A depicts a view of a stent 100. In some embodiments, a stent may include a pattern or network of interconnecting structural elements 105. Stent 100 may be formed from a tube (not shown). The pattern of structural elements 105 can take on a variety of patterns. The structural pattern of the device can be of virtually any design. The embodiments disclosed herein are not limited to stents or to the stent pattern illustrated in FIG. 1A. The embodiments are easily applicable to other patterns and other devices. The variations in the structure of patterns are virtually unlimited. A stent such as stent 100 may be fabricated from a tube by forming a pattern with a technique such as laser cutting or chemical etching.


An implantable medical device can be made partially or completely from a biodegradable, bioabsorbable, biostable polymer, or a combination thereof. A polymer for use in fabricating an implantable medical device can be biostable, bioabsorbable, biodegradable or bioerodible. Biostable refers to polymers that are not biodegradable. The terms biodegradable, bioabsorbable, and bioerodible are used interchangeably and refer to polymers that are capable of being completely degraded and/or eroded when exposed to bodily fluids such as blood and can be gradually resorbed, absorbed, and/or eliminated by the body. The processes of breaking down and absorption of the polymer can be caused by, for example, hydrolysis and metabolic processes.


Some polymers that may be suitable for implantable medical devices such as stents, have potential shortcomings. One shortcoming is that polymers may have inadequate modulus and strength for certain applications. The strength to weight ratio of polymers is smaller than that of metals. To compensate, a polymeric stent may require significantly thicker struts than a metallic stent, which results in an undesirably large profile.


Another potential shortcoming of polymer devices is limited shelf life due to physical aging and stress relaxation. These processes occur as a result of creep, which is gradual deformation that occurs in a polymeric construct. On the molecular level, creep results from relaxation of polymer chains. One way of describing chain relaxation is through a process of called reptation. In a reptation model, the movement or path of the polymer chains is depicted as through a tunnel.


Various embodiments of the present invention reduce or eliminate such shortcomings. Certain embodiments of the present invention include a stent fabricated from a polymeric material including a branched biodegradable polymer. In general, a branched polymer corresponds to a polymer with “side chains.” Branched polymers include, for example, hyperbranched-like polymers, comb-like polymers, star polymers, dendrimer-like star polymers, and dendrimers. A star-shaped polymer refers to a polymer having at least three chains or arms radiating outward from a common center. A dendritic polymer is a branched polymer resembling a tree-like structure. A comb structure corresponds to a linear polymer segment or backbone having a plurality of side chains extending outward from a position along the linear segment. In the embodiments described herein, the various polymer structures include a plurality of hydrolytically degradable functional groups or units.


It is believed that the process of reptation is reduced in polymeric materials that include branched polymers, which reduces creep of the material. Thus, a medical device including branched polymers should experience reduced physical aging and stress relaxation.


Additionally, it is also believed that branched polymers increase the strength of a polymer material. The chemical connectivity provided by the branched polymers can increase the strength of the polymeric material. The segments of the branched polymers may increase strength and stability of a polymer by acting as chemical net points, by increased entanglement, or both. Furthermore, it is expected that as a polymer degrades or absorbs, the degradation of mechanical properties, such as strength, is reduced due to the presence of branched polymers. Thus, a device made from a polymer including branched polymers is expected to maintain mechanical stability longer as it degrades.


In some embodiments, the branched polymers of the polymeric material can be homopolymers or copolymers. The copolymers can be random or block copolymers. In addition, the polymeric material can include one or more types of branched polymers. In some embodiments, the mechanical properties or degradation rate of the branched polymer can be controlled or tailored though its chemical composition. In one embodiment, the degradation rate of a branched copolymer can be increased by having a higher percentage of a unit that is more hydrolytically active. For example, the degradation rate of poly(L-lactide-co-glycolide) (LPLG) branched polymer can be increased by increasing the percentage of glycolide. In a similar manner, the toughness of a branched polymer can be controlled through the composition of units that form rubbery or elastomeric segments.


In certain embodiments, all or substantially all of the polymeric material of the stent is fabricated from a branched polymer. In other embodiments, a portion of the polymeric material of the stent includes a branched polymer. In some embodiments, the mechanical or degradation properties of the polymeric material can be tuned by varying the weight percent of branched polymers in the polymeric material. The weight percent of branched polymer in the polymeric material of the stent can be as high as 0.05 wt %, 1 wt %, 10 wt %, 30 wt %, 50 wt %, 70 wt %, 90 wt %, or 95 wt %.


In additional embodiments, the molecular weight of branched polymers can be used to tailor the mechanical and degradation properties of a polymeric material of a stent. In another embodiment, the molecular weight distribution of branched polymers can be used to control mechanical and degradation properties. The molecular weight distribution can be monodisperse, broad, bimodal, or multimodal. Properties of a monodisperse polymer may tend to change rapidly over a short time frame. Alternatively, properties of a polymer with a broad molecular weight distribution may change more gradually. A polymer with a bimodal or multimodal distribution may exhibit changes in properties in stages.


In additional embodiments, the chemical composition of branches of branched polymer of the polymeric material can be the same or different. In other embodiments, the molecular weight of branches can also be different. Thus, the mechanical and degradation properties of the polymeric material may be tailored by having branches with different chemical composition, molecular weight, or both.


Branched polymers are known one of ordinary skill in the art. For example, various kinds of branched polymer and synthesis and characterization of branched polymers can be found in U.S. Pat. No. 6,207,767; U.S. Pat. No. 6,231,960; U.S. Pat. No. 5,399,666; U.S. Pat. No. 5,225,521; U.S. Pat. No. 6,316,590; Lowenhielm et al., Macromol. Chem. Phys, 2004, 205, 1489-1496; Trollsas, M. et al., “Layered Dendritic Block Copolymers,” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. Engl. 1998, 110, 3308; Trollsas, M. et al., “Internal functionalization in hyperbranched polyesters,” J. Polym. Sci., Chem. Ed. 1998, 36, 3187; Trollsas M. et al., “Dendrimer-like Starpolymers,” J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1998, 120, 4644; Trollsas, M. et al., “Highly branched block copolymers: Design, synthesis and morphology,” Macromolecules, 1999, 32, 4917; Trollsas, M. et al., “Constitutional isomers of dendrimer-like starpolymers,” Macromolecules, 2000, 33, 6423; Trollsas, M. et al., “Dendritic homopolymers and block copolymers: Tuning the morphology and properties,” J. Polym. Sci., Chem. Ed. 2004, 42, 1174, Ihre et al., Macromolecules 1996, 118, 6388; and Johansson et al., J. Polym Sci., Polym. Chem. 1993, 31, 619.


Branched polymers of the polymeric material can include, but are not limited to, polylactide, polyglycolide, poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid), poly(ε-caprolactone), poly(trimethylene carbonate), poly(hydroxy butyrate), polydioxanone, poly(orthoesters) poly(ethylene carbonate), poly(propylene carbonate), poly(amides), poly(phosphoesters), poly(phosphazenes), poly(anhydrides) and any blends or copolymers thereof. Branched polymers can also include polyester amides, polypeptides, polyethylene glycol, polyacrylates, polymethacrylates, polypropylene oxides, polysaccharides, and any blends or copolymers thereof.


In some embodiments, a multi-arm star polymer can be used as a viscosity modifier to reduce the viscosity during melt processing of a polymer. In order to melt process a biodegradable polymer, the temperature of the polymer is increased to reduce the viscosity to allow flow of the polymer. To process high molecular weight polymers, it may be necessary process at a very high temperatures which can cause degradation of the polymer. For example, high molecular weight poly(L-lactide) (PLLA) with molecular weight in the range from 100 kD to 800 kD is extruded at temperatures between 400° F. to 440° F. The degradation of the polymer is accelerated in this temperature range.


It has been observed that multi-arm star copolymers can act as viscosity modifiers in melt processing of a polymer. Progr. Polym. Sci. 29, 2004, 183-275. Incorporating a multi-arm star copolymer with PLLA in melt processing reduces the viscosity of the polymer melt. As a result, the polymer can be processed at a lower temperature which reduces the amount of molecular weight degradation of the polymer during processing. In some embodiments, a multi-arm star copolymer can be blended into a polymer before, during, or after melt processing the polymer for an implantable medical device. In an embodiment, the multi-arm star copolymer can be composed of the same units as the polymer. In another embodiment, the multi-arm star copolymer can be composed of different units than the polymer. The multi-arm star copolymer can be less than 0.05 wt %, 1 wt %, 2 wt %, 5%, or less than 20 wt % of the blend.


Further embodiments of the present invention can include an implantable medical device fabricated from a polymer blend having a discrete phase within a continuous phase. In some embodiments, the polymer blend includes a matrix polymer blended with a star-block copolymer having at least three arms. In an embodiment, the arms include inner core segments and outer segments with the inner segments being immiscible with the outer segments and the matrix polymer. The inner segments form a discrete phase with the continuous phase which includes the matrix polymer and the outer segments. The star-block copolymer can be dispersed throughout the matrix polymer so that there are a plurality of discrete phase regions within the blend. A majority of the polymer blend includes the matrix polymer.


These embodiments can address additional shortcomings of polymers for relating to implantable medical devices. For example, some biodegradable polymers have a degradation rate that is slower than desired for certain stent treatments. As a result, the degradation time of a stent made from such polymers can be longer than desired. For example, a stent made from a semi-crystalline polymer such as PLLA can have a degradation time between about two and three years. In some treatment situations, a shorter degradation time is desirable, for example, less than 6 months or a year.


An additional shortcoming of some polymers is that their toughness can be lower than desired, in particular, for use in stent applications. As indicated above, it is important for a stent to have high radial strength and stiffness so that it can support a lumen. Some crystalline or semi-crystalline polymers that are glassy or have a Tg above body temperature are particularly attractive as stent materials due to their strength and stiffness. Some of these polymers, that may be suitable for implantable medical devices such as stents, have potential shortcomings. One shortcoming of such polymers is that their toughness can be lower than desired, in particular, for use in stent applications. For example, polymers such as PLLA are stiff and strong, but tend to be brittle under physiological conditions. Physiological conditions refer to conditions that an implant is exposed to within a human body. Physiological conditions include, but are not limited to, human body temperature, approximately 37° C. These polymers can exhibit a brittle fracture mechanism at these conditions in which there is little or no plastic deformation prior to failure. As a result, a stent fabricated from such polymers can have insufficient toughness for the range of use of a stent.


One way to increase fracture toughness of a matrix polymer is to blend it with a polymer having a higher or relatively high fracture toughness under physiological conditions, for example, a rubbery polymer or elastomer. The higher fracture toughness polymer should also be immiscible with the matrix polymer so that it forms a discrete or dispersed phase within the matrix polymer phase. However, the discrete or dispersed phase should be interfacially compatible with the matrix phase to reduce or eliminate the formation of voids at the interface of the phases when the polymer blend is under stress, for example, when a stent is expanded. The fracture toughness of a device is increased since the discrete phase can absorb energy arising from stress imparted to a device. To ensure good energy transfer between interfaces of the phases, it is important that there be sufficient bonding or adhesion between the phases. See, Y. Wang, etc. Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry, 39, 2001, 2755-2766.


In some embodiments, the matrix polymer has a high rigidity and a relatively low fracture toughness at physiological conditions. Such polymers may be selected as a matrix polymer for stent applications since such rigid polymers can support the walls of a vessel. The discrete phase inner segment can have a higher fracture toughness at physiological conditions. The discrete phase inner segments tend to increase the toughness of the polymer blend. The outer segments improve adhesion between the continuous and discrete phases to facilitate energy transfer between the phases.



FIG. 1B depicts a section of a segment 110 of strut 105 from the stent depicted in FIG. 1A. FIG. 2 depicts a microscopic schematic view of a portion 140 of segment 110 of a strut as depicted in FIG. 1B. Portion 140 includes a plurality of discrete phase regions 200 dispersed within a continuous phase 210.



FIG. 3 depicts a star-block copolymer 172 having four arms 174. Arms 174 have inner segments 176 (shown as broken lines) and outer segments 178. Inner segments 176 are discrete phase blocks and outer segments 178 are continuous phase blocks.



FIG. 4 depicts a schematic close-up view of section 250 of FIG. 2 of a discrete phase region 200 and the interface between discrete phase region 200 and continuous polymer phase 210. Section 250 includes a star-block copolymer with inner core segments 310 and outer segments 320. Line 330 delineates an approximate boundary between discrete phase region 200 and continuous phase 210. LD is a characteristic dimension of discrete phase region 200. For clarity, matrix polymer segments are not shown in continuous phase 210.


It is believed that when a device is placed under stress, the discrete phase tends to absorb energy when a fracture starts to propagate through a structural element. Crack propagation through the continuous phase may then be reduced or inhibited. As a result, fracture toughness of the polymer blend, and thus, the implantable medical device tends to be increased. The outer segments anchor the discrete phase regions within the matrix polymer, increasing the adhesion between the discrete phase and the continuous phase. Thus, the outer segments facilitate energy transfer between interfaces of the phases. Without the anchoring or adhesion provided by the outer segments, a propagating crack may go around the discrete phase, reducing the effectiveness of the discrete phase in absorbing energy imparted to a device.


Generally, it is desirable for the discrete phase regions to be uniformly or substantially uniformly dispersed throughout the polymer matrix to facilitate the increase in toughness. The more dispersed the discrete phase regions, the greater is the increase in toughness. Additionally, the increase in toughness is related to the size of the discrete phase. Both the degree of dispersion and discrete phase size can be controlled by the length or molecular weight of the discrete phase inner segments. The characteristic length of a discrete phase can be 1 nm to 100 nm, 100 nm to 500 nm, 500 nm to 1,000 nm, 1000 nm to 10,000 nm, or greater than 10,000 nm. The molecular weight of the inner segments can be adjusted to obtain a desired characteristic length. It can be 10-50 kD, 50-100 kD, or higher than 100 kD.


In general, the outer segments can be selected so that they are miscible with the matrix polymer. In some embodiments, the outer segments can be the same chemical composition as the matrix polymer. For example, a polymer blend with a PLLA matrix polymer can have PLLA outer segments. In some embodiments, the matrix polymer can be a copolymer having a high percentage of L-lactide units, for example, the L-lactide copolymer can have at least 80 weight percent of L-lactide units.


In some embodiments, the inner segments of the star-block copolymer include units that are from polymers having a higher fracture toughness at physiological conditions than a rigid matrix polymer, such as PLLA. The discrete phase inner segments can form a discrete phase that is more flexible and has a lower modulus than the matrix polymer of the continuous phase. The matrix polymer can be selected to have a Tg above body temperature, so that the matrix polymer remains rigid after implantation. Generally, the discrete phase inner segments may be selected that have a Tg below body temperature. In one embodiment, the discrete phase segments of the star-block polymer can be a rubbery or elastomeric polymer. An “elastomeric” or “rubbery” polymer refers to a polymer that exhibits elastic deformation though all or most of a range of deformation. In some embodiments, the discrete phase can be substantially or completely amorphous.


Biodegradable polymers having a relatively high fracture toughness at body temperature include, but are not limited to, polycaprolactone (PCL), poly(tetramethyl carbonate) (PTMC), poly(4-hydroxy butyrate), and polydioxanone. Thus, some embodiments of the discrete phase inner segments of the star-block polymer can include caprolactone (CL), tetramethyl carbonate (TMC), 4-hydroxy butyrate, dioxanone units, or a combination thereof.


In one embodiment, a polymer blend can have a PLLA matrix polymer with P(CL-co-TMC)-b-PLLA star-block copolymer dispersed within the PLLA matrix. The discrete phase inner segment is P(CL-co-TMC) and the outer segments are PLLA. The PLLA outer segments of the star-block copolymer for a continuous matrix phase. The PLLA outer segment binds the discrete phase with the continuous phase, facilitating the increase in the fracture toughness provided to the polymer blend. In exemplary embodiments, the polymer blend can include about 1-30 wt %, or more narrowly, 5-20 wt % of a star-block copolymer and about 75-95 wt % of matrix polymer.


Furthermore, a device fabricated from embodiments of the polymer blends can address issues relating to the degradation rate of polymer devices. As indicated above, a matrix polymer, such as PLLA, can have a degradation rate that is slower than desired for certain stent treatments. The slow degradation rate is due at least in part to the crystallinity of a matrix polymer. In some embodiments, the discrete phase inner segments of the star-block copolymer can be faster degrading that the matrix polymer. The faster degradation can be due at least in part to the amorphous structure of the discrete phase since the diffusion rate of fluids through an amorphous structure is generally faster than through a crystalline structure. The faster degrading inner segments increase water penetration and content in the discrete phase and in the continuous phase. The increased water penetration and content causes an increase in the degradation rate of the blend, and thus, the device.


In additional embodiments, the star-block copolymer can include units in the discrete phase inner segments with characteristics that tend to increase the degradation rate of the blend. For example, the discrete phase inner segments can include units that are more hydrophilic than the matrix polymer. The discrete phase inner segments can also have units that are more hydrolytically active than the matrix polymer. These two characteristics increase the moisture content of the polymer blend which increases the degradation rate of the blend. Additionally, the discrete phase inner segments can also have units that have acidic and hydrophilic degradation products. Since the rate of the hydrolysis reaction tends to increase as the pH decreases, acidic degradation products can increase the degradation rate of the blend and the device. Glycolide (GA) units, for example, have acidic degradation products which can increase the degradation rate of a polymer blend when included in a discrete phase inner segment.


In some embodiments, the discrete phase inner segments can include units that increase the fracture toughness (toughness-enhancing units) of the polymer blend and units that have one or more of the characteristics that increase degradation rate mentioned above (fast degrading units). In an exemplary embodiment, the discrete phase inner segments can include both CL and GA units. In particular, the discrete phase inner segments can be poly(glycolide-co-ε-caprolactone) (P(GA-co-CL)). P(GA-co-CL) discrete phase inner segments can have alternating or random GA and CL units.


An exemplary star-block copolymer for blending with PLLA can include PLLA-b-P(CL-co-GA). The faster degrading GA units can increase the degradation rate of the polymer blend by increasing the equilibrium water content and penetration into the structural element. Degradation of GA units further increases the degradation rate due to the acidic and hydrophilic degradation products.


In some embodiments, the flexibility and degradation rate of the discrete phase inner segments can be adjusted by the ratio of fast degrading and toughness-enhancing units. As the ratio of CL, for example, increases in P(GA-co-CL) segments, the star-block copolymer becomes more flexible and tougher. The Tg of the discrete phase inner segments can be tuned to a desired value by adjusting the ratio of component monomers. For example, the Tg of the discrete phase may be engineered to be less than a body temperature to provide a more flexible discrete phase under physiological conditions. Additionally, the degradation rate of the discrete phase inner segments, and thus the blend, can be increased by increasing the fraction of GA in the discrete phase inner segments. In exemplary embodiments, the P(GA-co-CL) segments can have up to 1 wt %, 5 wt %, 20 wt %, 50 wt %, 70 wt %, 80 wt %, or 90 wt % GA units.


In an exemplary embodiment, a polymer blend can have a PLLA matrix polymer with P(GA-co-CL)-b-PLLA star-block copolymer dispersed within the PLLA matrix. The discrete phase inner segments are P(GA-co-CL) and the outer segments are PLLA. The PLLA outer segments of the star-block copolymer phase separate into the PLLA matrix of the continuous matrix phase. The PLLA outer segment binds the discrete phase with the continuous phase, facilitating the increase in the fracture toughness provided to the polymer blend. In exemplary embodiments, the polymer blend can include about 1-30 wt %, or more narrowly, 5-20 wt % of a star-block copolymer and about 75-95 wt % of matrix polymer.


In further embodiments, the matrix polymer can be a copolymer. In some embodiments, a matrix copolymer can be composed of a primary functional group and at least one additional secondary functional group. The copolymer matrix may be a random copolymer including the primary functional group and at least one additional secondary functional group. In an embodiment, the copolymer with at least one secondary functional group can have a higher degradation rate than a homopolymer composed of the primary functional group. A secondary functional group can have a greater affinity for water or be more hydrolytically active than the secondary functional group. The secondary functional group can have acidic and hydrophilic degradation products that enhance the degradation of the matrix polymer and polymer blend. Additionally, a copolymer matrix may have lower crystallinity, which also tends to increase degradation rate. In some exemplary embodiments, the weight percent of the secondary functional group in the copolymer can have up to 1%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 30%, 40%, or, at least about 50%. In some embodiments, the weight percent of the secondary function group can be greater than 50%.


In an exemplary embodiment, the matrix copolymer can be poly(L-lactide-co-glycolide) (LPLG). The primary functional group can be L-lactide and the secondary functional group can be GA. The weight percent of the GA in the copolymer can be up to 1%, 5%, 10%, 15%, 30%, 40%, or at least about 50%. In certain exemplary embodiments, the weight percent of the GA group can be adjusted so that the degradation time of a stent, can be less than 18 months, 12 months, 8 months, 5 months, 3 months, or more narrowly, less than 3 months.


Additionally, the outer segments of the star-block copolymer can be selected so that the outer segments are miscible with the matrix copolymer. In one embodiment, the outer segment can have the same chemical composition as the matrix copolymer. In another embodiment, the outer segment can have a composition different from the matrix copolymer, but close enough so that the outer segment is miscible with the matrix polymer. In another embodiment, the outer segments can have a composition different from the matrix polymer with the outer segments being miscible with the matrix polymer.


In another exemplary embodiment, a polymer blend can have a LPLG matrix polymer with P(CL-co-TMC)-b-LPLG star-block copolymer dispersed within the LPLG matrix. The discrete phase inner segments are P(CL-co-TMC) and the outer segments are LPLG. The LPLG outer segments of the star-block copolymer phase separate into the LPLG matrix of the continuous matrix phase. The LPLG outer segment binds the discrete phase with the continuous phase, facilitating the increase in the fracture toughness provided to the polymer blend. In exemplary embodiments, the polymer blend can include about 1-30 wt %, or more narrowly, 5-20 wt % of a star-block copolymer and about 75-95 wt % of matrix polymer.


In a further exemplary embodiment, a polymer blend can have an LPLG matrix polymer with P(GA-co-CL)-b-LPLG star-block copolymer dispersed within the LPLG matrix. The discrete phase inner segments are P(GA-co-CL) and the outer segments are LPLG.


Biodegradable multi-arm star-block copolymers can be synthesized through ring opening polymerization. J. Biomater. Sci. Polymer Edn., Vol. 17, 2006, 615-630. In some embodiments, a star-block copolymer, such as P(CL-co-TMC)-b-PLLA, P(GA-co-CL)-b-PLLA, P(CL-co-TMC)-b-LPLG, or P(GA-co-CL)-b-LPLG, can be formed by solution-based polymerization. Other methods used to form the star-block copolymers are also possible, such as, without limitation, melt phase polymerization. In solution-based polymerization, all the reactive components involved in the polymerization reaction are dissolved in a solvent.


To prepare P(CL-co-TMC)-b-PLLA star-block copolymer, a precursor P(CL-co-TMC) star copolymer may be prepared first by solution polymerization. The P(CL-co-TMC) star copolymer is then employed as a macro-initiator to initiate the polymerization of L-lactide monomers to form the PLLA outer segments. This scheme is illustrated in FIG. 5. Specifically, P(CL-co-TMC) star copolymer is formed first by mixing glycerol, CL units, and TMC units with a solvent to form a solution. In the solution, the glycerol, CL, and TMC units react to form a three arm P(GA-co-CL) star copolymer. L-lactide monomers are added to the solution or another solution containing the formed P(CL-co-TMC) star copolymer. The L-lactide monomers react with P(CL-co-TMC) star copolymer to form P(CL-co-TMC)-b-PLLA star-block copolymer.


To prepare P(GA-co-CL)-b-PLLA star-block copolymer, precursor P(GA-co-CL) star copolymer is formed first in a solution containing a solvent with GA units, CL units, and pentaerythritol. L-lactide monomers are then added to the solution to react with P(GA-co-CL) star copolymer to form P(GA-co-CL)-b-PLLA star block copolymer.


To prepare P(CL-co-TMC)-b-LPLG star-block copolymer, precursor P(CL-co-TMC) star copolymer is formed first in a solution containing a solvent with CL units, TMC units, and glycerol. L-lactide and GA units are then added to the solution to react with P(CL-co-TMC) star copolymer to form P(CL-co-TMC)-b-LPLG star-block copolymer.


The solvent(s) for forming the outer segments can be selected so that the star copolymer precursor is soluble in the solvent(s) to enable the precursor copolymer to copolymerize with outer segment units.


In other embodiments, star-block copolymers can be formed by reacting precursor star copolymers swollen with a solvent that contain outer segment units. The precursor star copolymer is swollen by a solvent after it is formed so that it can react with outer segment units. One of skill in the art can select a solvent that swells but does not dissolve the precursor star copolymer.


In one embodiment, the solvent for use in synthesizing the copolymer is devoid of alcohol functional groups. Such alcohol groups may act as initiators for chain growth in the polymer. Solvents used to synthesize the star-block copolymer include, but are not limited to, chloroform, toluene, xylene, and cyclohexane.


In some embodiments, the polymer blend of the matrix polymer and the star-block copolymer can be formed by solution blending, melt blending, or a combination thereof. The matrix polymer can be co-extruded with the polymer blend. The extruded polymer blend may be formed into a polymer construct, such as a tube or sheet which can be rolled or bonded to form a construct such as a tube. An implantable medical device may then be fabricated from the construct. For example, a stent can be fabricated from a tube by laser machining a pattern in to the tube. In another embodiment, a polymer construct may be formed from the polymer blend using an injection molding apparatus.


In general, representative examples of polymers that may be used in embodiments of the present invention include, but are not limited to, poly(N-acetylglucosamine) (Chitin), Chitosan, poly(hydroxyvalerate), poly(lactide-co-glycolide), poly(hydroxybutyrate), poly(hydroxybutyrate-co-valerate), polyorthoester, polyanhydride, poly(glycolic acid), poly(glycolide), poly(L-lactic acid), poly(L-lactide), poly(D,L-lactic acid), poly(L-lactide-co-glycolide); poly(D,L-lactide), poly(caprolactone), poly(trimethylene carbonate), polyethylene amide, polyethylene acrylate, poly(glycolic acid-co-trimethylene carbonate), co-poly(ether-esters) (e.g. PEO/PLA), polyphosphazenes, biomolecules (such as fibrin, fibrinogen, cellulose, starch, collagen and hyaluronic acid), polyurethanes, silicones, polyesters, polyolefins, polyisobutylene and ethylene-alphaolefin copolymers, acrylic polymers and copolymers other than polyacrylates, vinyl halide polymers and copolymers (such as polyvinyl chloride), polyvinyl ethers (such as polyvinyl methyl ether), polyvinylidene halides (such as polyvinylidene chloride), polyacrylonitrile, polyvinyl ketones, polyvinyl aromatics (such as polystyrene), polyvinyl esters (such as polyvinyl acetate), acrylonitrile-styrene copolymers, ABS resins, polyamides (such as Nylon 66 and polycaprolactam), polycarbonates, polyoxymethylenes, polyimides, polyethers, polyurethanes, rayon, rayon-triacetate, cellulose, cellulose acetate, cellulose butyrate, cellulose acetate butyrate, cellophane, cellulose nitrate, cellulose propionate, cellulose ethers, and carboxymethyl cellulose.


Additional representative examples of polymers that may be especially well suited for use in embodiments of the present invention include ethylene vinyl alcohol copolymer (commonly known by the generic name EVOH or by the trade name EVAL), poly(butyl methacrylate), poly(vinylidene fluoride-co-hexafluororpropene) (e.g., SOLEF 21508, available from Solvay Solexis PVDF, Thorofare, N.J.), polyvinylidene fluoride (otherwise known as KYNAR, available from ATOFINA Chemicals, Philadelphia, Pa.), ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymers, and polyethylene glycol.


For the purposes of the present invention, the following terms and definitions apply:


For the purposes of the present invention, the following terms and definitions apply:


The “glass transition temperature,” Tg, is the temperature at which the amorphous domains of a polymer change from a brittle vitreous state to a solid deformable, ductile, or rubbery state at atmospheric pressure. In other words, the Tg corresponds to the temperature where the onset of segmental motion in the chains of the polymer occurs. When an amorphous or semicrystalline polymer is exposed to an increasing temperature, the coefficient of expansion and the heat capacity of the polymer both increase as the temperature is raised, indicating increased molecular motion. As the temperature is raised the actual molecular volume in the sample remains constant, and so a higher coefficient of expansion points to an increase in free volume associated with the system and therefore increased freedom for the molecules to move. The increasing heat capacity corresponds to an increase in heat dissipation through movement. Tg of a given polymer can be dependent on the heating rate and can be influenced by the thermal history of the polymer. Furthermore, the chemical structure of the polymer heavily influences the glass transition.


“Stress” refers to force per unit area, as in the force acting through a small area within a plane. Stress can be divided into components, normal and parallel to the plane, called normal stress and shear stress, respectively. True stress denotes the stress where force and area are measured at the same time. Conventional stress, as applied to tension and compression tests, is force divided by the original gauge length.


“Strength” refers to the maximum stress along an axis which a material will withstand prior to fracture. The ultimate strength is calculated from the maximum load applied during the test divided by the original cross-sectional area.


“Modulus” may be defined as the ratio of a component of stress or force per unit area applied to a material divided by the strain along an axis of applied force that results from the applied force taken at very low strain where the stress-strain curve is linear. For example, a material has both a tensile and a compressive modulus. A material with a relatively high modulus tends to be stiff or rigid. Conversely, a material with a relatively low modulus tends to be flexible. The modulus of a material depends on the molecular composition and structure, temperature of the material, amount of deformation, and the strain rate or rate of deformation. For example, below its Tg, a polymer can be brittle with a high modulus. As the temperature of a polymer is increased from below to above its Tg, its modulus decreases by approximately 5 orders of magnitude.


“Strain” refers to the amount of elongation or compression that occurs in a material at a given stress or load.


“Elongation” may be defined as the increase in length in a material which occurs when subjected to stress. It is typically expressed as a percentage of the original length.


“Toughness” is the amount of energy absorbed prior to fracture, or equivalently, the amount of work required to fracture a material. One measure of toughness is the area under a stress-strain curve from zero strain to the strain at fracture. Thus, a brittle material tends to have a relatively low toughness.


“Solvent” is defined as a substance capable of dissolving or dispersing one or more other substances or capable of at least partially dissolving or dispersing the substance(s) to form a uniformly dispersed solution at the molecular- or ionic-size level at a selected temperature and pressure. The solvent should be capable of dissolving at least 0.1 mg of the polymer in 1 ml of the solvent, and more narrowly 0.5 mg in 1 ml at the selected temperature and pressure, for example, ambient temperature and ambient pressure.


EXAMPLES

The examples set forth below are for illustrative purposes only and are in no way meant to limit the invention. The following examples are given to aid in understanding the invention, but it is to be understood that the invention is not limited to the particular materials or procedures of examples.


Example 1

The following prophetic example illustrates the synthesis of a multi-arm star copolymer: P(CL-co-TMC)-b-PLLA. In this example the following are used: CL, TMC, and L-lactide (LLA) as monomers; stannous octoate as catalyst; propane-1,2,3-triol (glycerol) as initiator; and xylene as solvent. The proposed synthesis is as follows:


Step 1: One 2-Liter (L) reactor with a mechanical stirring rod is placed in a sealed glove box filled with high purity nitrogen. The reactor is preheated to 120° C. for 1 h and purged with high purity nitrogen to remove the moisture and oxygen.


Step 2: A mixture of 100 g CL, 100 g TMC, 92 mg glycerol, 500 mL xylene, and 704 mg stannous octoate is added into the reactor. The solution in the reactor is then stirred at 120° C. for between 70 h and 120 h.


Step 3: 100 g LLA and 280 mg additional catalyst is then added into the reactor. The mixture is stirred at 120° C. for up to 70 h.


Step 4: Once the polymerization is finished, 1 L CHCl3 is added into reactor to dilute the final product. Then the final product is precipitated into 4-L methanol and dried in vacuum at 80° C. until constant weight is achieved.


Example 2

The following prophetic example illustrates preparation of a blend of the multi-arm copolymer synthesized in Example 1 and PLLA and preparation of a stent from the blend:


Step 1: Break P(CL-co-TMC)-b-PLLA star copolymer obtained in Example 1 into small pieces in a blender or a cryomiller.


Step 2: Mix PLLA and star copolymer (100:10) through solution blending or mechanical blending.


Step 3: Extrude PLLA/star copolymer mixture through a signal/twin screw extruder at a temperature to minimize the degradation of PLLA.


Step 4: Prepare stent from extruding tubing.


Example 3

The following prophetic example illustrates the synthesis of a multi-arm star copolymer: P(GA-co-CL)-b-PLLA. In this example the following are used: CL, GA, and LLA as monomers; stannous octoate as catalyst; pentaerythritol as initiator; and xylene as solvent. The proposed synthesis is as follows:


Step 1: 30 g GA, 20 g CL, 0.035 g pentaerythritol, and 100 ml xylene are added into a reactor free of moisture and oxygen.


Step 2: 100 mg stannous octoate are added after the temperature has increased to 100° C. The solution will become very viscous.


Step 3: Approximately 24 h later, 25 g LLA, and 0.14 mL catalyst are added.


Step 4: Approximately 96 h later, the final product can be precipitated into methanol and dried in a vacuum oven overnight.


Example 4

The following prophetic example illustrates the synthesis of a multi-arm star copolymer: P(CL-co-TMC)-b-LPLG. In this example the following are used: CL, GA, TMC, and LLA as monomers; stannous octoate as catalyst; glycerol as initiator; and xylene as solvent. The proposed synthesis is as follows:


Step 1: 100 g CL, 100 g TMC, 92 mg glycerol, 500 mL xylene are added into a reactor free of moisture and oxygen.


Step 2: 704 mg stannous octoate are added after the temperature has increased to 120° C. The polymerization solution is stirred at 120° C. for 72 h.


Step 3: 95 g LLA, 5 g GA, and 280 mg stannous octoate are added into the reactor.


Step 4: Approximately 48 h later, the final product is precipitated into methanol and dried in a vacuum oven overnight.


Example 5

The following prophetic example illustrates the synthesis of a multi-arm star copolymer: P(GA-co-CL)-b-LPLG. In this example the following are used: CL, GA, and LLA as monomers; stannous octoate as catalyst; pentaerythritol as initiator; and xylene as solvent. The proposed synthesis is as follows:


Step 1: 30 g GA, 20 g CL, 0.035 g pentaerythritol, and 100 ml xylene are added into a reactor free of moisture and oxygen.


Step 2: 100 mg stannous octoate are added after the temperature has increased to 100° C. The solution will become very viscous.


Step 3: Approximately 72 h later 23.75 g LLA, 1.25 g GA, and 0.14 mL catalyst are added.


Step 4: Approximately 48 h later, the final product is precipitated into methanol and dried in a vacuum oven overnight.


Example 6

The following prophetic example illustrates preparation of a blend of P(TMC-co-CO)-b-LPLG (Example 4) or P(GA-co-CL)-b-LPLG (Example 5) and LPLG and preparation of a stent from the blend:


Step 1: Break P(CL-co-TMC)-b-LPLG or P(GA-co-CL)-b-LPLG star copolymer into small pieces and mix with LPLG with 5 wt % GA content in a blender.


Step 2: Extrude the mixture of LPLG/star copolymer (100:10 weight ratio) through signal or twin screw extruder.


Step 3: Radially expand the extruded tubing and cut into stent with a laser.


While particular embodiments of the present invention have been shown and described, it will be obvious to those skilled in the art that changes and modifications can be made without departing from this invention in its broader aspects. Therefore, the appended claims are to encompass within their scope all such changes and modifications as fall within the true spirit and scope of this invention.

Claims
  • 1. A stent fabricated from a polymeric material comprising an unbranched biodegradable polymer blended with a branched biodegradable polymer, wherein a majority of the polymeric material comprises the unbranched polymer.
  • 2. The stent of claim 1, wherein the polymeric material comprises greater than 95 wt % of the unbranched polymer.
  • 3. The stent of claim 1, wherein the branched polymer is a star copolymer, wherein the star copolymer reduces the viscosity of the polymeric material when above a melting temperature of the polymeric material.
  • 4. The stent of claim 1, wherein the unbranched polymer is selected from the group consisting of poly(L-lactide), poly(DL-lactide), poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid), poly(ε-caprolactone), and any blends or copolymers thereof.
  • 5. The stent of claim 1, wherein the branched polymer is selected from the group consisting of poly(L-lactide), poly(DL-lactide), poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid), poly(ε-caprolactone), and any blends or copolymers thereof.
CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims benefit of and incorporates by reference U.S. Patent Application No. 60/810,302, which was filed on Jun. 1, 2006.

US Referenced Citations (327)
Number Name Date Kind
3687135 Stroganov et al. Aug 1972 A
3839743 Schwarcz Oct 1974 A
3900632 Robinson Aug 1975 A
4104410 Malecki Aug 1978 A
4110497 Hoel Aug 1978 A
4321711 Mano Mar 1982 A
4346028 Griffith Aug 1982 A
4596574 Urist Jun 1986 A
4599085 Riess et al. Jul 1986 A
4612009 Drobnik et al. Sep 1986 A
4633873 Dumican et al. Jan 1987 A
4656083 Hoffman et al. Apr 1987 A
4718907 Karwoski et al. Jan 1988 A
4722335 Vilasi Feb 1988 A
4723549 Wholey et al. Feb 1988 A
4732152 Wallstén et al. Mar 1988 A
4733665 Palmaz Mar 1988 A
4739762 Palmaz Apr 1988 A
4740207 Kreamer Apr 1988 A
4743252 Martin, Jr. et al. May 1988 A
4768507 Fischell et al. Sep 1988 A
4776337 Palmaz Oct 1988 A
4800882 Gianturco Jan 1989 A
4816339 Tu et al. Mar 1989 A
4818559 Hama et al. Apr 1989 A
4850999 Planck Jul 1989 A
4877030 Beck et al. Oct 1989 A
4878906 Lindemann et al. Nov 1989 A
4879135 Greco et al. Nov 1989 A
4886062 Wiktor Dec 1989 A
4902289 Yannas Feb 1990 A
4977901 Ofstead Dec 1990 A
4994298 Yasuda Feb 1991 A
5019090 Pinchuk May 1991 A
5028597 Kodama et al. Jul 1991 A
5059211 Stack et al. Oct 1991 A
5062829 Pryor et al. Nov 1991 A
5084065 Weldon et al. Jan 1992 A
5085629 Goldberg et al. Feb 1992 A
5100429 Sinofsky et al. Mar 1992 A
5104410 Chowdhary Apr 1992 A
5108417 Sawyer Apr 1992 A
5108755 Daniels et al. Apr 1992 A
5112457 Marchant May 1992 A
5123917 Lee Jun 1992 A
5156623 Hakamatsuka et al. Oct 1992 A
5163951 Pinchuk et al. Nov 1992 A
5163952 Froix Nov 1992 A
5163958 Pinchuk Nov 1992 A
5167614 Tessmann et al. Dec 1992 A
5192311 King et al. Mar 1993 A
5197977 Hoffman, Jr. et al. Mar 1993 A
5225521 Spinu Jul 1993 A
5234456 Silvestrini Aug 1993 A
5234457 Andersen Aug 1993 A
5236447 Kubo et al. Aug 1993 A
5279594 Jackson Jan 1994 A
5282860 Matsuno et al. Feb 1994 A
5289831 Bosley Mar 1994 A
5290271 Jernberg Mar 1994 A
5306286 Stack et al. Apr 1994 A
5306294 Winston et al. Apr 1994 A
5328471 Slepian Jul 1994 A
5330500 Song Jul 1994 A
5342348 Kaplan Aug 1994 A
5342395 Jarrett et al. Aug 1994 A
5342621 Eury Aug 1994 A
5356433 Rowland et al. Oct 1994 A
5383925 Schmitt Jan 1995 A
5385580 Schmitt Jan 1995 A
5389106 Tower Feb 1995 A
5399666 Ford Mar 1995 A
5423885 Williams Jun 1995 A
5441515 Khosravi et al. Aug 1995 A
5443458 Eury et al. Aug 1995 A
5443500 Sigwart Aug 1995 A
5455040 Marchant Oct 1995 A
5464650 Berg et al. Nov 1995 A
5502158 Sinclair et al. Mar 1996 A
5514379 Weissleder et al. May 1996 A
5527337 Stack et al. Jun 1996 A
5545408 Trigg et al. Aug 1996 A
5554120 Chen et al. Sep 1996 A
5556413 Lam Sep 1996 A
5578046 Liu et al. Nov 1996 A
5578073 Haimovich et al. Nov 1996 A
5591199 Porter et al. Jan 1997 A
5591607 Gryaznov et al. Jan 1997 A
5593403 Buscemi Jan 1997 A
5593434 Williams Jan 1997 A
5599301 Jacobs et al. Feb 1997 A
5599922 Gryaznov et al. Feb 1997 A
5605696 Eury et al. Feb 1997 A
5607442 Fischell et al. Mar 1997 A
5607467 Froix Mar 1997 A
5618299 Khosravi et al. Apr 1997 A
5629077 Turnlund et al. May 1997 A
5631135 Gryaznov et al. May 1997 A
5632771 Boatman et al. May 1997 A
5632840 Campbell May 1997 A
5637113 Tartaglia et al. Jun 1997 A
5649977 Campbell Jul 1997 A
5667767 Greff et al. Sep 1997 A
5667796 Otten Sep 1997 A
5670558 Onishi et al. Sep 1997 A
5693085 Buirge et al. Dec 1997 A
5700286 Tartaglia et al. Dec 1997 A
5707385 Williams Jan 1998 A
5711763 Nonami et al. Jan 1998 A
5716981 Hunter et al. Feb 1998 A
5725549 Lam Mar 1998 A
5726297 Gryaznov et al. Mar 1998 A
5728751 Patnaik Mar 1998 A
5733326 Tomonto et al. Mar 1998 A
5733330 Cox Mar 1998 A
5733564 Lehtinen Mar 1998 A
5733925 Kunz et al. Mar 1998 A
5741881 Patnaik Apr 1998 A
5756457 Wang et al. May 1998 A
5756476 Epstein et al. May 1998 A
5765682 Bley et al. Jun 1998 A
5766204 Porter et al. Jun 1998 A
5766239 Cox Jun 1998 A
5766710 Turnlund et al. Jun 1998 A
5769883 Buscemi et al. Jun 1998 A
5780807 Saunders Jul 1998 A
5800516 Fine et al. Sep 1998 A
5811447 Kunz et al. Sep 1998 A
5824049 Ragheb et al. Oct 1998 A
5830178 Jones et al. Nov 1998 A
5830461 Billiar Nov 1998 A
5830879 Isner Nov 1998 A
5833651 Donovan et al. Nov 1998 A
5834582 Sinclair et al. Nov 1998 A
5836962 Gianotti Nov 1998 A
5837313 Ding et al. Nov 1998 A
5837835 Gryaznov et al. Nov 1998 A
5840083 Braach-Maksvytis Nov 1998 A
5851508 Greff et al. Dec 1998 A
5853408 Muni Dec 1998 A
5854207 Lee et al. Dec 1998 A
5855612 Ohthuki et al. Jan 1999 A
5855618 Patnaik et al. Jan 1999 A
5858746 Hubbell et al. Jan 1999 A
5865814 Tuch Feb 1999 A
5868781 Killion Feb 1999 A
5873904 Ragheb et al. Feb 1999 A
5874101 Zhong et al. Feb 1999 A
5874109 Ducheyne et al. Feb 1999 A
5874165 Drumheller Feb 1999 A
5876743 Ibsen et al. Mar 1999 A
5877263 Patnaik et al. Mar 1999 A
5879713 Roth et al. Mar 1999 A
5888533 Dunn Mar 1999 A
5891192 Murayama et al. Apr 1999 A
5897955 Drumheller Apr 1999 A
5906759 Richter May 1999 A
5914182 Drumheller Jun 1999 A
5916870 Lee et al. Jun 1999 A
5922005 Richter et al. Jul 1999 A
5942209 Leavitt et al. Aug 1999 A
5948428 Lee et al. Sep 1999 A
5954744 Phan et al. Sep 1999 A
5957975 Lafont et al. Sep 1999 A
5965720 Gryaznov et al. Oct 1999 A
5971954 Conway et al. Oct 1999 A
5976182 Cox Nov 1999 A
5980564 Stinson Nov 1999 A
5980928 Terry Nov 1999 A
5980972 Ding Nov 1999 A
5981568 Kunz et al. Nov 1999 A
5986169 Gjunter Nov 1999 A
5997468 Wolff et al. Dec 1999 A
6010445 Armini et al. Jan 2000 A
6015541 Greff et al. Jan 2000 A
6042875 Ding et al. Mar 2000 A
6048964 Lee et al. Apr 2000 A
6051648 Rhee et al. Apr 2000 A
6056993 Leidner et al. May 2000 A
6060451 DiMaio et al. May 2000 A
6066156 Yan May 2000 A
6071266 Kelley Jun 2000 A
6074659 Kunz et al. Jun 2000 A
6080177 Igaki et al. Jun 2000 A
6080488 Hostettler et al. Jun 2000 A
6083258 Yadav Jul 2000 A
6093463 Thakrar Jul 2000 A
6096070 Ragheb et al. Aug 2000 A
6096525 Patnaik Aug 2000 A
6099562 Ding et al. Aug 2000 A
6103230 Billiar et al. Aug 2000 A
6107416 Patnaik et al. Aug 2000 A
6110188 Narciso, Jr. Aug 2000 A
6113629 Ken Sep 2000 A
6117979 Hendriks et al. Sep 2000 A
6120536 Ding et al. Sep 2000 A
6120904 Hostettler et al. Sep 2000 A
6121027 Clapper et al. Sep 2000 A
6125523 Brown et al. Oct 2000 A
6127173 Eckstein et al. Oct 2000 A
6129761 Hubbell Oct 2000 A
6129928 Sarangapani et al. Oct 2000 A
6150630 Perry et al. Nov 2000 A
6153252 Hossainy et al. Nov 2000 A
4776337 Palmaz Dec 2000 B1
6159951 Karpeisky et al. Dec 2000 A
6160084 Langer et al. Dec 2000 A
6165212 Dereume et al. Dec 2000 A
6166130 Rhee et al. Dec 2000 A
6169170 Gryaznov et al. Jan 2001 B1
6171609 Kunz Jan 2001 B1
6174330 Stinson Jan 2001 B1
6177523 Reich et al. Jan 2001 B1
6183505 Mohn, Jr. et al. Feb 2001 B1
6187045 Fehring et al. Feb 2001 B1
6207767 Bennett et al. Mar 2001 B1
6210715 Starling et al. Apr 2001 B1
6224626 Steinke May 2001 B1
6228845 Donovan et al. May 2001 B1
6231960 Dyer et al. May 2001 B1
6240616 Yan Jun 2001 B1
6245076 Yan Jun 2001 B1
6245103 Stinson Jun 2001 B1
6248344 Ylanen et al. Jun 2001 B1
6251135 Stinson et al. Jun 2001 B1
6251142 Bernacca et al. Jun 2001 B1
6273913 Wright et al. Aug 2001 B1
6281262 Shikinami Aug 2001 B1
6284333 Wang et al. Sep 2001 B1
6287332 Bolz et al. Sep 2001 B1
6290721 Heath Sep 2001 B1
6293966 Frantzen Sep 2001 B1
6303901 Perry et al. Oct 2001 B1
6312459 Huang et al. Nov 2001 B1
6316590 Coates et al. Nov 2001 B1
6327772 Zadno-Azizi et al. Dec 2001 B1
4733665 Palmaz Jan 2002 C2
6375826 Wang et al. Apr 2002 B1
6379381 Hossainy et al. Apr 2002 B1
6380303 Ogoe et al. Apr 2002 B1
6387121 Alt May 2002 B1
6388043 Langer et al. May 2002 B1
6395326 Castro et al. May 2002 B1
6409761 Jang Jun 2002 B1
6423092 Datta et al. Jul 2002 B2
6461632 Gogolewski Oct 2002 B1
6464720 Boatman et al. Oct 2002 B2
6479565 Stanley Nov 2002 B1
6485512 Cheng Nov 2002 B1
6492615 Flanagan Dec 2002 B1
6494908 Huxel et al. Dec 2002 B1
6495156 Wenz et al. Dec 2002 B2
6511748 Barrows Jan 2003 B1
6517888 Weber Feb 2003 B1
6527801 Dutta Mar 2003 B1
6537589 Chae et al. Mar 2003 B1
6539607 Fehring et al. Apr 2003 B1
6540777 Stenzel Apr 2003 B2
6554854 Flanagan Apr 2003 B1
6565599 Hong et al. May 2003 B1
6569191 Hogan May 2003 B1
6569193 Cox et al. May 2003 B1
6572672 Yadav et al. Jun 2003 B2
6574851 Mirizzi Jun 2003 B1
6585755 Jackson et al. Jul 2003 B2
6592614 Lenker et al. Jul 2003 B2
6592617 Thompson Jul 2003 B2
6613072 Lau et al. Sep 2003 B2
6626939 Burnside et al. Sep 2003 B1
6635269 Jennissen Oct 2003 B1
6645243 Vallana et al. Nov 2003 B2
6656162 Santini, Jr. et al. Dec 2003 B2
6664335 Krishnan Dec 2003 B2
6666214 Canham Dec 2003 B2
6667049 Janas et al. Dec 2003 B2
6669723 Killion et al. Dec 2003 B2
6676697 Richter Jan 2004 B1
6679980 Andreacchi Jan 2004 B1
6689375 Wahlig et al. Feb 2004 B1
6695920 Pacetti et al. Feb 2004 B1
6706273 Roessler Mar 2004 B1
6709379 Brandau et al. Mar 2004 B1
6719934 Stinson Apr 2004 B2
6719989 Matsushima et al. Apr 2004 B1
6720402 Langer et al. Apr 2004 B2
6746773 Llanos et al. Jun 2004 B2
6752826 Holloway et al. Jun 2004 B2
6753007 Haggard et al. Jun 2004 B2
6764505 Hossainy et al. Jul 2004 B1
6818063 Kerrigan Nov 2004 B1
6846323 Yip et al. Jan 2005 B2
6924347 Morgan et al. Aug 2005 B2
7241455 Richard Jul 2007 B2
7517914 Richard Apr 2009 B2
20010044652 Moore Nov 2001 A1
20020002399 Huxel et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020004060 Heublein et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020004101 Ding et al. Jan 2002 A1
20020032298 Bennett et al. Mar 2002 A1
20020062148 Hart May 2002 A1
20020065553 Weber May 2002 A1
20020071822 Uhrich Jun 2002 A1
20020111590 Davila et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020116050 Kocur Aug 2002 A1
20020138133 Lenz et al. Sep 2002 A1
20020161114 Gunatillake et al. Oct 2002 A1
20030033001 Igaki Feb 2003 A1
20030065355 Weber Apr 2003 A1
20030093107 Parsonage et al. May 2003 A1
20030100865 Santini, Jr. et al. May 2003 A1
20030105518 Dutta Jun 2003 A1
20030105530 Pirhonen Jun 2003 A1
20030171053 Sanders Sep 2003 A1
20030187495 Cully et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030195610 Herrmann et al. Oct 2003 A1
20030208259 Penhasi Nov 2003 A1
20030209835 Chun et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030226833 Shapovalov et al. Dec 2003 A1
20030236563 Fifer Dec 2003 A1
20040093077 White et al. May 2004 A1
20040098095 Burnside et al. May 2004 A1
20040111149 Stinson Jun 2004 A1
20040127970 Saunders et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040143317 Stinson et al. Jul 2004 A1
20040167610 Fleming, III Aug 2004 A1
20050137381 Pacetti Jun 2005 A1
20060095122 Pacetti May 2006 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (39)
Number Date Country
44 07 079 Sep 1994 DE
197 31 021 Jan 1999 DE
198 56 983 Dec 1999 DE
0 108 171 May 1984 EP
0 144 534 Jun 1985 EP
0 364 787 Apr 1990 EP
0 397 500 Nov 1990 EP
0 464 755 Jan 1992 EP
0 493 788 Jul 1992 EP
0 554 082 Aug 1993 EP
0 578 998 Jan 1994 EP
0 604 022 Jun 1994 EP
0 621 017 Oct 1994 EP
0 623 354 Nov 1994 EP
0 665 023 Aug 1995 EP
0 709 068 May 1996 EP
0 970 711 Jan 2000 EP
2 247 696 Mar 1992 GB
WO 8903232 Apr 1989 WO
WO 9001969 Mar 1990 WO
WO 9004982 May 1990 WO
WO 9006094 Jun 1990 WO
WO 9117744 Nov 1991 WO
WO 9117789 Nov 1991 WO
WO 9210218 Jun 1992 WO
WO 9306792 Apr 1993 WO
WO 9421196 Sep 1994 WO
WO 9529647 Nov 1995 WO
WO 9804415 Feb 1998 WO
WO 9902168 Jan 1999 WO
WO 9903515 Jan 1999 WO
WO 9916386 Apr 1999 WO
WO 9942147 Aug 1999 WO
WO 0012147 Mar 2000 WO
WO 0064506 Nov 2000 WO
WO 0101890 Jan 2001 WO
WO 02096967 Dec 2002 WO
WO 02096967 Dec 2002 WO
WO 2004023985 Mar 2004 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (54)
Entry
U.S. Appl. No. 10/317,435, filed Dec. 11, 2002, Hossainy et al.
Acquarulo et al., Enhancing Medical Device Performance with Nanocomposite Poly, Med. Device Link, www.devicelink.com/grabber.php3?URL downloaded Mar. 26, 2007, 4 pgs.
Anonymous, Bioabsorbable stent mounted on a catheter having optical coherence tomography capabilities, Research Disclosure, Sep. 2004, pp. 1159-1162.
Ansari, End-to-end tubal anastomosis using an absorbable stent, Fertility and Sterility, vol. 32(2), pp. 197-201 (Aug. 1979).
Ansari, Tubal Reanastomosis Using Absorbable Stent, International Journal of Fertility, vol. 23(4), pp. 242-243 (1978).
Asplund et al., Effects of hydrolysis on a new biodegradable co-polymer, J. Biomater. Sci. Polymer Edn. vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 615-630 (2006).
Bull, Parylene Coating for Medical Applications, Medical Product Manufacturing News 18, 1 pg. (Mar. 1993).
Casper et al., Fiber-Reinforced Absorbable Composite for Orthopedic Surgery, Polymeric Materials Science and Engineering, vol. 53 pp. 497-501 (1985).
Detweiler et al., Gastrointestinal Sutureless Anastomosis Using Fibrin Glue: Reinforcement of the Sliding Absorbable Intraluminal Nontoxic Stent and Development of a Stent Placement Device, Journal of Investigative Surgery, vol. 9(2), pp. 111-130 (Mar. /Apr. 1996).
Detweiler et al., Sliding, Absorbable, Reinforced Ring and an Axially Driven Stent Placement Device for Sutureless Fibrin Glue Gastrointestinal Anastomisis, Journal of Investigative Surgery, vol. 9(6), pp. 495-504 (Nov./Dec. 1996).
Detweiler et al., Sutureless Anastomosis of the Small Intestine and the Colon in Pigs Using an Absorbable Intraluminal Stent and Fibrin Glue, Journal of Investigative Surgery, vol. 8(2), pp. 129-140 (Mar. 1995).
Detweiler et al., Sutureless Cholecystojejunostomy in Pigs Using an Absorbable Intraluminal Stent and Fibrin Glue, Journal of Investigative Surgery, vol. 9(1), pp. 13-26 (Jan./Feb. 1996).
Devanathan et al., Polymeric Conformal Coatings for Implantable Electronic Devices, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, vol. BME-27(11), pp. 671-675 (1980).
Elbert et al., Conjugate Addition Reactions Combined with Free-Radical Cross-Linking for the Design of Materials for Tissue Engineering, Biomacromolecules, vol. 2, pp. 430-441 (2001).
Gao et al., Hyperbranched polymers: from synthesis to applications, Prog. Polym. Sci. 29, pp. 183-275 (2004).
Hahn et al., Biocompatibility of Glow-Discharge-Polymerized Films and Vacuum-Deposited Parylene, J Applied Polymer Sci, vol. 38, pp. 55-64 (1984).
Hahn et al., Glow Discharge Polymers as Coatings for Implanted Devices, ISA, pp. 109-111 (1981).
He et al., Assessment of Tissue Blood Flow Following Small Artery Welding with an Intraluminal Dissolvable Stent, Microsurgery, vol. 19(3), pp. 148-152 (1999).
Ihre et al., Synthesis, Characterization, and H NMR Self-Diffusion Studies of Dendritic Aliphatic Polyesters Based on 2,2-Bis(hydroxymethyl)propionic Acid and 1,1,1-Tris(hydroxyphenyl)ethane, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 118, pp. 6388-6395 (1996).
Johansson et al., Synthesis, Characterization, and Curing of Hyperbranched Allyl Ether-Maleate Functional Ester Resins, J. of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chem. vol. 31, pp. 619-624 (1993).
Kelley et al., Totally Resorbable High-Strength Composite Material, Advances in Biomedical Polymers, vol. 35, pp. 75-85 (1987).
Kubies et al., Microdomain Structure in polylactide-block-poly(ethylene oxide) copolymer films, Biomaterials, vol. 21, pp. 529-536 (2000).
Kutryk et al., Coronary Stenting: Current Perspectives, a companion to the Handbook of Coronary Stents, pp. 1-16 (1999).
Löwenhielm et al. Poly (neopentylene carbonate) Hyperstars, Macromol. Chem. Phys. 205, pp. 1489-1496 (2004).
Martin et al., Enhancing the biological activity of immobilized osteopontin using a type-1 collagen affinity coating, J. Biomed. Mater. Res., vol. 70A, pp. 10-19 (2004).
Mauduit et al., Hydrolytic degradation of films prepared from blends of high and low molecular weight poly(DL-lactic acid)s, J. Biomed. Mater. Res., vol. 30, pp. 201-207 (1996).
Middleton et al., Synthetic biodegradable polymers as orthopedic devices, Biomaterials, vol. 21, pp. 2335-2346 (2000).
Muller et al., Advances in Coronary Angioplasty: Endovascular Stents, Coron. Arter. Dis., vol. 1(4), pp. 438-448 (Jul./Aug. 1990).
nanoComposix, products, www.nanocomposix.com, downloaded Mar. 26, 2007, 2 pgs.
Nanosiliver, Photocatalyst and Nanocomposite Material, http://eng.nanocomposite.net downloaded Mar. 26, 2007, 1 pg.
Nichols et al., Electrical Insulation of Implantable Devices by Composite Polymer Coatings, ISA Transactions, vol. 26(4), pp. 15-18 (1987).
Peuster et al., A novel approach to temporary stenting: degradable cardiovascular stents produced from corrodible metal-results 6-18 months after implantation into New Zealand white rabbits, Heart, vol. 86, pp. 563-569 (2001).
Pietrzak et al., Bioabsorbable Fixation Devices: Status for the Craniomaxillofacial Surgeon, J. Craniofaxial Surg., vol. 2, pp. 92-96 (1997).
Pietrzak et al., Bioresorbable implants—practical considerations, Bone, vol. 19, No. 1, Supplement Jul. 1996, pp. 109S-119S.
Redman, Clinical Experience with Vasovasostomy Utilizing Absorbable Intravasal Stent, Urology, vol. 20(1), pp. 59-61 (Jul. 1982).
Rust et al., The Effect of Absorbable Stenting on Postoperative Stenosis of the Surgically Enlarged Maxillary Sinus Ostia in a Rabbit Animal Model, Archives of Otolaryngology, vol. 122(12) pp. 1395-1397 (Dec. 1996).
Schatz, A View of Vascular Stents, Circulation, vol. 79(2), pp. 445-457 (Feb. 1989).
Schmidt et al., Long-Term Implants of Parylene-C Coated Microelectrodes, Med & Biol Eng & Comp, vol. 26(1), pp. 96-101 (Jan. 1988).
Spagnuolo et al., Gas 1 is induced by VE-cadherin and vascular endothelial growth factor and inhibits endothelial cell apoptosis, Blood, vol. 103, pp. 3005-3012 (2004).
Tamai et al., Initial and 6-Month Results of Biodegradable Poly-I-Lactic Acid Coronary Stents in Humans, Circulation, pp. 399-404 (Jul. 25, 2000).
Trollsås et al., Constitutional Isomers of Dendrimer-like Star Polymers: Design, Synthesis, and Conformational and Structural Properties, Macromolecules 33, pp. 6423-6438 (2000).
Trollsås et al., Dendritic Homopolymers and Block Copolymers: Tuning the Morphology and Properties, J. of Polymer Science: Part A. Polymer Chem. vol. 42, pp. 1174-1188 (2004).
Trollsås et al., Highly Branched Block Copolymers: Design, Synthesis, and Morphology, Macromolecules 32, pp. 4917-4924 (1999).
Trollsås et al., Dendrimer-like Star Polymers, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 120, pp. 4644-4651 (1998).
Trollsås et al., Internal Functionalization in Hyperbranched Polyesters, J. of Polymer Science: Part A. Polymer Chem. vol. 36, pp. 3187-3192 (1998).
Trollsås et al., Layered Dendritic Block Copolymers, Angew. Chem. Int. 37, No. 22, pp. 3132-3136 (1998).
Tsuji et al., Biodegradable Polymeric Stents, Current Interventional Cardiology Reports, vol. 3, pp. 10-17 (2001).
Völkel et al., Targeting of immunoliposomes to endothelial cells using a single—chain Fv fragment directed against human endoglin (CD105), Biochimica et Biophysica Acta 1663, pp. 158-166 (2004).
von Recum et al., Degradation of polydispersed poly(L-lactic acid) to modulate lactic acid release, Biomaterials, vol. 16, pp. 441-445 (1995).
Wang et al., Polyethylene-Poly(L-lactide) Diblock Copolymers: Synthesis and Compatibilization of Poly(L-lactide)/Polyethylene Blends, J. of Polymer Science: Part A. Polymer Chem. vol. 39, pp. 2755-2766 (2001).
Yau et al., Modern Size-Exclusion Liquid Chromatography, Wiley-Interscience Publication, IX-XV (1979).
International Search Report for PCT/US2007/012981, mailed Jun. 27, 2008, 5 pgs.
Asplund et al., “Effects of hydrolysis on a new biodegradable co-polymer”, J. Biomater Sci. Polymer Edn. vol. 17, No. 6, pp. 615-630 (2006).
Buschnakowski et al., “Influence of Phase Separation Behaviour on Toughness of Compression Moulded SBS Star Block Copolymer/Polystyrene Blends”, Macromol. Symp. 233, pp. 66-77 (2006).
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20070282435 A1 Dec 2007 US
Provisional Applications (1)
Number Date Country
60810302 Jun 2006 US