Patent Grant
11478370
The present invention relates to bioresorbable scaffolds; more particularly, this invention relates to bioresorbable scaffolds for treating an anatomical lumen of the body.
Radially expandable endoprostheses are artificial devices adapted to be implanted in an anatomical lumen. An “anatomical lumen” refers to a cavity, or duct, of a tubular organ such as a blood vessel, urinary tract, and bile duct. Stents are examples of endoprostheses that are generally cylindrical in shape and function to hold open and sometimes expand a segment of an anatomical lumen. 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 the walls of the blood vessel 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 an anatomical lumen to a desired treatment site, such as a lesion. “Deployment” corresponds to expansion 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 the anatomical lumen, advancing the catheter in the anatomical lumen to a desired treatment location, expanding the stent at the treatment location, and removing the catheter from the lumen.
The following terminology is used. When reference is made to a “stent”, this term will refer to a permanent structure, usually comprised of a metal or metal alloy, generally speaking, while a scaffold will refer to a structure comprising a bioresorbable polymer, or other resorbable material such as an erodible metal, and capable of radially supporting a vessel for a limited period of time, e.g., 3, 6 or 12 months following implantation. It is understood, however, that the art sometimes uses the term “stent” when referring to either type of structure.
Scaffolds and stents traditionally fall into two general categories—balloon expanded and self-expanding. The later type expands (at least partially) to a deployed or expanded state within a vessel when a radial restraint is removed, while the former relies on an externally-applied force to configure it from a crimped or stowed state to the deployed or expanded state.
Self-expanding stents are designed to expand significantly when a radial restraint is removed such that a balloon is often not needed to deploy the stent. Self-expanding stents do not undergo, or undergo relatively no plastic or inelastic deformation when stowed in a sheath or expanded within a lumen (with or without an assisting balloon). Balloon expanded stents or scaffolds, by contrast, undergo a significant plastic or inelastic deformation when both crimped and later deployed by a balloon.
In the case of a balloon expandable stent, the stent is mounted about a balloon portion of a balloon catheter. The stent is compressed or crimped onto the balloon. Crimping may be achieved by use of an iris-type or other form of crimper, such as the crimping machine disclosed and illustrated in US 2012/0042501. A significant amount of plastic or inelastic deformation occurs both when the balloon expandable stent or scaffold is crimped and later deployed by a balloon. At the treatment site within the lumen, the stent is expanded by inflating the balloon.
The stent must be able to satisfy a number of basic, functional requirements. The stent (or scaffold) must be capable of sustaining radial compressive forces as it supports walls of a vessel. Therefore, a stent must possess adequate radial strength. After deployment, the stent must adequately maintain its size and shape throughout its service life despite the various forces that may come to bear on it. In particular, the stent must adequately maintain a vessel at a prescribed diameter for a desired treatment time despite these forces. The treatment time may correspond to the time required for the vessel walls to remodel, after which the stent is no longer needed.
Examples of bioresorbable polymer scaffolds include those described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,002,817 to Limon, U.S. Pat. No. 8,303,644 to Lord, and U.S. Pat. No. 8,388,673 to Yang.
Scaffolds may be made from a biodegradable, bioabsorbable, bioresorbable, or bioerodable polymer. The terms biodegradable, bioabsorbable, bioresorbable, biosoluble or bioerodable refer to the property of a material or stent to degrade, absorb, resorb, or erode away from an implant site. Scaffolds may also be constructed of bioerodible metals and alloys. The scaffold, as opposed to a durable metal stent, is intended to remain in the body for only a limited period of time. 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. Moreover, it has been shown that biodegradable scaffolds allow for improved healing of the anatomical lumen as compared to metal stents, which may lead to a reduced incidence of late stage thrombosis. In these cases, there is a desire to treat a vessel using a polymer scaffold, in particular a bioabsorable or bioresorbable polymer scaffold, as opposed to a metal stent, so that the prosthesis's presence in the vessel is temporary.
Polymeric materials considered for use as a polymeric scaffold, e.g. poly(L-lactide) (“PLLA”), poly(D,L-lactide-co-glycolide) (“PLGA”), poly(D-lactide-co-glycolide) or poly(L-lactide-co-D-lactide) (“PLLA-co-PDLA”) with less than 10% D-lactide, poly(L-lactide-co-caprolactone), poly(caprolactone), PLLD/PDLA stereo complex, and blends of the aforementioned polymers may be described, through comparison with a metallic material used to form a stent, in some of the following ways. Polymeric materials typically possess a lower strength to volume ratio compared to metals, which means more material is needed to provide an equivalent mechanical property. Therefore, struts must be made thicker and wider to have the required strength for a stent to support lumen walls at a desired radius. The scaffold made from such polymers also tends to be brittle or have limited fracture toughness. The anisotropic and rate-dependent inelastic properties (i.e., strength/stiffness of the material varies depending upon the rate at which the material is deformed, in addition to the temperature, degree of hydration, thermal history) inherent in the material, only compound this complexity in working with a polymer, particularly, bioresorbable polymers such as PLLA or PLGA.
One additional challenge with using a bioresorbable polymer (and polymers generally composed of carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen) for a scaffold structure is that the material is radiolucent with no radiopacity. Bioresorbable polymers tend to have x-ray absorption similar to body tissue. A known way to address the problem is to attach radiopaque markers to structural elements of the scaffold, such as a strut, bar arm or link. For example,
There needs to be a reliable way of attaching the markers 11 to the link element 9d so that the markers 11 will not separate from the scaffold during a processing step like crimping the scaffold to a balloon or when the scaffold is balloon-expanded from the crimped state. These two events—crimping and balloon expansion—are particularly problematic for marker adherence to the scaffold because both events induce significant plastic deformation in the scaffold body. If this deformation causes significant out of plane or irregular deformation of struts supporting, or near to markers the marker can dislodge (e.g., if the strut holding the marker is twisted or bent during crimping the marker can fall out of its hole). A scaffold with radiopaque markers and methods for attaching the marker to a scaffold body is discussed in US20070156230.
There is a continuing need to improve upon the reliability of radiopaque marker securement to a scaffold; and there is also a need to improve upon methods of attaching radiopaque markers to meet demands for scaffold patterns or structure that render prior methods of marker attachment in adequate or unreliable.
What is disclosed are scaffolds having radiopaque markers and methods for attaching radiopaque markers to a strut, link or bar arm of a polymeric scaffold.
According to one aspect markers are re-shaped to facilitate a better retention within a marker hole. Examples include a marker shaped as a rivet.
According to another aspect a hole for retaining the marker is re-shaped to better secure the marker in the hole.
According to another aspect of the invention a scaffold structure for holding a marker and method for making the same addresses a need to maintain a low profile for struts exposed in the bloodstream, while ensuring the marker will be securely held in the strut. Low profiles for struts mean thinner struts or thinner portions of struts. The desire for low profiles addresses the degree thrombogenicity of the scaffold, which can be influenced by a strut thickness overall and/or protrusion from a strut surface. Blood compatibility, also known as hemocompatibility or thromboresistance, is a desired property for scaffolds and stents. The adverse event of scaffold thrombosis, while a very low frequency event, carries with it a high incidence of morbidity and mortality. To mitigate the risk of thrombosis, dual anti-platelet therapy is administered with all coronary scaffold and stent implantation. This is to reduce thrombus formation due to the procedure, vessel injury, and the implant itself. Scaffolds and stents are foreign bodies and they all have some degree of thrombogenicity. The thrombogenicity of a scaffold refers to its propensity to form thrombus and this is due to several factors, including strut thickness, strut width, strut shape, total scaffold surface area, scaffold pattern, scaffold length, scaffold diameter, surface roughness and surface chemistry. Some of these factors are interrelated. Low strut profile also leads to less neointimal proliferation as the neointima will proliferate to the degree necessary to cover the strut. As such coverage is a necessary step to complete healing. Thinner struts are believed to endothelialize and heal more rapidly.
Markers attached to a scaffold having thinner struts, however, may not hold as reliably as a scaffold having thicker struts since there is less surface contact area between the strut and marker. Embodiments of invention address this need.
According to another aspect a thickness of the combined marker and strut is kept below threshold values of about 150 microns while reliably retaining the marker in the hole.
According to another aspect there is a process for forming a rivet and mounting the rivet to a scaffold strut to produce a high resistance to dislodgment of the rivet from the scaffold and avoids complexities associated with orientation and placement of a rivet-shaped bead into a hole having a size of about 250 microns.
According to another aspect there is a process for cold-forming a 203-305 micron (0.008-0.012 inch) diameter platinum bead into the shape of a conventional rivet without losing orientation of the finished rivet. The finished rivet is securely held in a forming die where it can be ejected in a controlled manner into a vacuum pick up tool mounted to a robotic end effector. Cold forming the rivet into a die solves the problem of preserving the orientation of the rivet and eliminates secondary positioning and handling for fitting into the scaffold hole, which is very difficult due to the small size of the finished rivet.
According to another aspect there is a process that allows swaging of a rivet into final position from the abluminal side of a scaffold. The same cold forming method to produce the rivet can be used to swage the rivet and secure it in the scaffold. A stepped mandrel design may be used to hold the scaffold and provide clearance under the rivet which allows swaging the rivet tip on the luminal side of the scaffold. This process creates a trapezoidal or frustoconical shank that secures the rivet to the scaffold. Using this approach allows for automating the rivet manufacturing process and a controlled installation method for swaging the rivet into a polymer scaffold, thereby reducing manufacturing costs and finished product variation.
According to other aspects of the invention, there is a scaffold, medical device, method for making such a scaffold, method of making a marker, attaching a marker to a strut, link or bar arm of a scaffold, or method for assembly of a medical device comprising such a scaffold having one or more, or any combination of the following things (1) through (24):
(1) A method to reduce thrombogenicity, or a scaffold having reduced thrombogenicity, the scaffold comprising a strut, the strut including a strut thickness and a marker attached to the strut, wherein the strut has a thickness (t) and the marker has a length (L, as measured from an abluminal to luminal surface portions of the marker) and is held in the strut, the marker including a portion that protrudes outward from the strut's abluminal and/or luminal surface, wherein the marker length (L) and strut/link/bar arm thickness (t) are related as follows: 1.2≤(L/t)≤1.8; 1.1≤(L′/t)≤1.5; 1.0≤(L/t)≤1.8; and/or 1.0≤(L′/t)≤1.5, where L is an undeformed length (e.g., rivet, tube), and L′ is a deformed length (e.g. a swaged rivet).
(2) A scaffold comprising a bar arm, link or strut having a hole holding a marker, or a method for making the same according to one or more, or any combination of features described for a Concept E, infra, and with reference to illustrative examples shown in
(3) An aspect ratio (AR) of strut width (w) to wall thickness (t) (AR=w/t) is between 0.5 to 2.0, 0.5 to 1.5, 0.7 to 1.5, 0.7 to 1.3, 0.9 to 1.5, 0.9 to 1.2, 1.0 to 1.5, 1.5 to 2.0, or 2.0 to 3.0.
(4) A scaffold comprising a deformed marker secured to a strut, bar arm and/or link, wherein the marker is a rivet pre-made or formed prior to being mounted on a scaffold.
(5) A combined bump (luminal side plus abluminal side, and referring to a portion of a marker and/or polymer at the marker) is no more than a strut or link thickness, e.g., no more than 100 or 85 microns, so that the length at the marker is at most twice a strut or bar arm thickness.
(6) A combined bump (luminal side plus abluminal side, and referring to a portion of a marker and/or polymer at the marker) is at least 10-50% more than a thickness of a strut or bar arm at the marker.
(7) A wall thickness for a scaffold (before-crimp diameter of 3 to 5 mm) is less than 150 microns, less than 140 microns, less than 130 microns, about 100 micron, 80 to 100 microns, 80 to 120 microns, 90 to 100 microns, 90 to 110 microns, 110 to 120 microns, or 95 to 105 microns. More preferably a wall thickness is between 80 and 100 microns, and more preferably between 85 and 95 microns; and
(8) A wall thickness for a scaffold (before-crimp diameter of 7 to 10 mm) is less than 280 microns, less than 260 microns, less than 240 microns, about 190 micron, 149 to 186 microns, 149 to 220 microns, 170 to 190 microns, 170 to 210 microns, 210 to 220 microns. More preferably a wall thickness is between 150 and 190 microns for a scaffold having an outer diameter of 7, 8 or 9 mm.
(9) A polymeric scaffold is heated about 0-20 degrees above its Tg during or after marker placement and prior to crimping, such as prior to and within 24 hours of crimping; wherein the heating improves a retention force maintaining a marker in a hole.
(10) The radiopaque marker is comprised of platinum, platinum/iridium alloy, iridium, tantalum, palladium, tungsten, niobium, zirconium, iron, zinc, magnesium, manganese or their alloys.
(11) A process for attaching a radiopaque marker including pressing a bead into a die to form a radiopaque rivet, removing the rivet from the die using a tool connected to a head of the rivet and while the head remains connected to the tool, placing the rivet within a scaffold hole, wherein the rivet orientation is maintained from the time it is removed from the die to when it is placed in the hole.
(12) A rivet locked in a strut of a scaffold by swaging, the rivet having a mechanical locking angle θ such as the locking angle θ in
(13) A process for attaching a marker to a scaffold, including deforming the marker between a first and second ram head, wherein the coefficient of friction (Mu) between the head and marker surface on one side is higher than Mu on the opposite side; for example, Mu>0.17 on one side and Mu<0.17 on the other side.
(14) A rivet mounted to a scaffold and satisfying a minimum distance of at least one of δ1, δ2 and δ3 with respect to a strut rim structure as discussed in connection with
(15) A marker engaged with a scaffold hole, the marker including a shank shaped as a frustum engaged with the hole and a head disposed on the outer surface.
(16) A tapered marker hole, or a hole having one of a luminal and abluminal opening is greater than the other.
(17) A method for attaching a non-spherical marker to a hole, including forming a spherical bead into a rivet and lifting from the die and placing into the hole the formed rivet using a tool to maintain the orientation of the rivet marker.
(18) A method for making a medical device, including using a polymer scaffold including a strut having a hole formed in the strut, wherein the strut has a thickness of between 80 and 120 microns measured between a first side of the strut and a second side of the strut and the strut comprises poly(L-lactide); and using a radiopaque rivet marker having a head and a shank; and placing the rivet into the hole so that the head is disposed on a first surface of the first side of the strut; and swaging the rivet including making a deformed shank from the rivet shank while the rivet sits in the hole; wherein the head resists a first push-out force acting on the first surface by the head interfering with the first side of the hole; and wherein the deformed shank resists a second push-out force acting on a second surface of the second side of the strut by the deformed shank interfering with the second side of the hole.
(19) The method of item (18) including one or more of, or combination of the following things: wherein the deformed shank has a flange disposed on the second surface; wherein the first surface is one of a luminal and abluminal surface of the scaffold and the second surface is one of the other of the luminal and abluminal surface; the method further comprising using a rivet having a shank length greater than the strut thickness such that a shank portion extends out from the hole's second side when the rivet is in the hole, and the swaging step makes the flange from the shank portion extending out from the second side; the method further comprising using a rivet having a shank length greater than the strut thickness such that a shank portion extends out from the hole's second side when the rivet is in the hole, wherein the shank is a cylinder, and wherein the deformed shank is a frustum; wherein the head is disposed at a first opening of the first side of the hole and a base of the frustum is disposed at a second opening of the second side of the hole, and wherein the swaging step makes the second opening larger than the first opening; wherein the deformed shank has a first end proximal of the head and a second end distal of the head, the first end is disposed at a first opening of the hole and the second end is disposed at a second opening of the hole, wherein prior to the swaging step the first and second ends have the same diameter, and wherein the swaging step deforms the second opening and the second end such that the second end and second opening are larger than the first end and the first opening, respectively; wherein the marker rivet has an undeformed length (L) before swaging, a deformed length (L′) after swaging, and L, L′ and the strut thickness (t) are related by t×(1.2)≤L≤t×(1.8) and 1.2≤(L/t)≤1.8; and t×(1.1)≤L′≤t×(1.5) and 1.1≤(L′/t)≤1.5; wherein the scaffold strut comprises poly(L-lactide); wherein the scaffold is made from a polymer having a glass transition temperature (Tg), wherein the polymeric scaffold is heated 0-20 degrees above its Tg after the marker rivet is deformed; and/or wherein the rivet is comprised of platinum, platinum/iridium alloy, iridium, tantalum, palladium, tungsten, niobium, zirconium, iron, zinc, magnesium, manganese or their alloys.
(20) A process for attaching a radiopaque material to a polymeric scaffold, comprising: using a die, deforming a spherical bead into a rivet having a head and shank, the bead comprising the radiopaque material; attaching a tool to the rivet head, including creating a pressure difference at a tip of the tool to adhere the rivet head to the tool tip thereby enabling the tool to lift and remove the rivet from the die and maintain an orientation of the rivet relative to the tip; removing the rivet from the die using a tool; without removing the rivet from the tip of the tool, placing the rivet into a hole of the scaffold wherein the orientation of the rivet relative to the tool tip to enable placement of the shank into the hole; wherein following the placing step the rivet head rests on one of a luminal and abluminal surface of the strut and a tail of the shank extends out from the other of the luminal and abluminal surface; and forming an interference fit between the rivet and hole including deforming the tail.
(21) The method of item (20) including wherein the die comprises a plate having a hole and a counter bore; wherein the die comprises a plate having a tapered hole, such that the shank of the rivet is tapered; wherein the scaffold has a strut thickness and a shank of the rivet has a length that is between 125% and 150% of the strut thickness; wherein the hole is a tapered hole after forming the interference fit; wherein the forming step includes deforming a shank of the rivet into a frustum; wherein the hole is a polygonal hole or an elliptical hole; and/or wherein the tool comprises a vacuum tip configured for grabbing the head of the rivet and releasing the head therefrom by modifying a gas pressure at the tip.
(22) A medical device, comprising: a scaffold having a thickness and a pattern of elements forming a tubular body, the elements comprising rings interconnected by links, wherein at least one of the links comprises: a hole, and a rim substantially circumscribing the hole and defining a hole wall and a strut edge, wherein a distance between the wall and the edge is D; a radiopaque marker disposed in the hole, the marker including a head having a flange disposed on the rim; wherein the flange has a radial length of between ½ D and less than D; wherein the scaffold thickness (t) is related to a length (L) of the marker measured between an abluminal and luminal surface of the marker by 1.1≤(L/t)≤1.8.
(23) A radiopaque marker constructed according to Concept A, Concept B, Concept C, Concept D, Concept E, Concept F, Concept G or combinations thereof.
(24) A radiopaque marker and scaffold link/strut having a hole to receive the marker, and having a high resistance to dislodgment according to one or more of, or any combination of Concepts A, B, C, and/or D combined with the marker according to Concept E.
All publications and patent applications mentioned in the present specification are herein incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each individual publication or patent application was specifically and individually indicated to be incorporated by reference. To the extent there are any inconsistent usages of words and/or phrases between an incorporated publication or patent and the present specification, these words and/or phrases will have a meaning that is consistent with the manner in which they are used in the present specification.
In the description like reference numbers appearing in the drawings and description designate corresponding or like elements among the different views.
For purposes of this disclosure, the following terms and definitions apply:
The terms “about,” “approximately,” “generally,” or “substantially” mean 30%, 20%, 15%, 10%, 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 1.5%, 1%, between 1-2%, 1-3%, 1-5%, or 0.5% -5% less or more than, less than, or more than a stated value, a range or each endpoint of a stated range, or a one-sigma, two-sigma, three-sigma variation from a stated mean or expected value (Gaussian distribution). For example, d1 about d2 means d1 is 30%, 20%, 15%, 10%, 5%, 4%, 3%, 2%, 1.5%, 1%, 0% or between 1-2%, 1-3%, 1-5%, or 0.5%-5% different from d2. If d1 is a mean value, then d2 is about d1 means d2 is within a one-sigma, two-sigma, or three-sigma variance or standard deviation from d1.
It is understood that any numerical value, range, or either range endpoint (including, e.g., “approximately none”, “about none”, “about all”, etc.) preceded by the word “about,” “approximately,” “generally,” or “substantially” in this disclosure also describes or discloses the same numerical value, range, or either range endpoint not preceded by the word “about,” “approximately,” “generally,” or “substantially.”
A “stent” means a permanent, durable or non-degrading structure, usually comprised of a non-degrading metal or metal alloy structure, generally speaking, while a “scaffold” means a temporary structure comprising a bioresorbable or biodegradable polymer, metal, alloy or combination thereof and capable of radially supporting a vessel fora limited period of time, e.g., 3, 6 or 12 months following implantation. It is understood, however, that the art sometimes uses the term “stent” when referring to either type of structure.
“Inflated diameter” or “expanded diameter” refers to the inner diameter or the outer diameter the scaffold attains when its supporting balloon is inflated to expand the scaffold from its crimped configuration to implant the scaffold within a vessel. The inflated diameter may refer to a post-dilation balloon diameter which is beyond the nominal balloon diameter, e.g., a 6.5 mm balloon (i.e., a balloon having a 6.5 mm nominal diameter when inflated to a nominal balloon pressure such as 6 times atmospheric pressure) has about a 7.4 mm post-dilation diameter, or a 6.0 mm balloon has about a 6.5 mm post-dilation diameter. The nominal to post dilation ratios for a balloon may range from 1.05 to 1.15 (i.e., a post-dilation diameter may be 5% to 15% greater than a nominal inflated balloon diameter). The scaffold diameter, after attaining an inflated diameter by balloon pressure, will to some degree decrease in diameter due to recoil effects related primarily to, any or all of, the manner in which the scaffold was fabricated and processed, the scaffold material and the scaffold design.
When reference is made to a diameter it shall mean the inner diameter or the outer diameter, unless stated or implied otherwise given the context of the description.
When reference is made to a scaffold strut, it also applies to a link or bar arm.
“Post-dilation diameter” (PDD) of a scaffold refers to the inner diameter of the scaffold after being increased to its expanded diameter and the balloon removed from the patient's vasculature. The PDD accounts for the effects of recoil. For example, an acute PDD refers to the scaffold diameter that accounts for an acute recoil in the scaffold.
A “before-crimp diameter” means an outer diameter (OD) of a tube from which the scaffold was made (e.g., the scaffold is cut from a dip coated, injection molded, extruded, radially expanded, die drawn, and /or annealed tube) or the scaffold before it is crimped to a balloon. Similarly, a “crimped diameter” means the OD of the scaffold when crimped to a balloon. The “before-crimp diameter” can be about 2 to 2.5, 2 to 2.3, 2.3, 2, 2.5, 3.0 times greater than the crimped diameter and about 0.9, 1.0, 1.1, 1.3 and about 1-1.5 times higher than an expanded diameter, the nominal balloon diameter, or post-dilation diameter. Crimping, for purposes of this disclosure, means a diameter reduction of a scaffold characterized by a significant plastic deformation, i.e., more than 10%, or more than 50% of the diameter reduction is attributed to plastic deformation, such as at a crown in the case of a stent or scaffold that has an undulating ring pattern, e.g.,
A material “comprising” or “comprises” poly(L-lactide) or PLLA includes, but is not limited to, a PLLA polymer, a blend or mixture including PLLA and another polymer, and a copolymer of PLLA and another polymer. Thus, a strut comprising PLLA means the strut may be made from a material including any of a PLLA polymer, a blend or mixture including PLLA and another polymer, and a copolymer of PLLA and another polymer.
Bioresorbable scaffolds comprised of biodegradable polyester polymers are radiolucent. In order to provide for fluoroscopic visualization, radiopaque markers are placed on the scaffold. For example, the scaffold described in U.S. Pat. No. 8,388,673 ('673 patent) has two platinum markers 206 secured at each end of the scaffold 200, as shown in
With reference to
Additional scaffold structure considered within the scope of this disclosure is the alternative scaffold patterns having the marker structure for receiving markers as described in
One method for marker placement forces a spherical-like body into a cylindrical hole. This process is illustrated by
According to one example, the hole 22 has a hole diameter (d) of 233.7 μm and an average initial spherical marker size (Johnson-Matthey marker beads) of 236.7 μm. The thickness (t) is 157.5 microns and hole 22 volume is t×πd2=6.76E6 μm3. The average spherical volume size is 6.94E6 μm3. Hence, in this embodiment when the spherical marker 25 is press-fit into the hole 22, the marker 25 is deformed from a generally spherical shape into more of a cylindrical shape. In some embodiments an average volume size for the marker 25 may be only slightly larger in volume (3%) than a hole 22 volume. Larger beads presumably stretch the rim of the link strut while smaller beads will contact the walls 24 when deformed, but do not fill the hole 22 volume completely. As would be understood, the about flush with the luminal and abluminal surfaces accounts for the variances in marker 25 volume size from the manufacturer and volume size variances of the hole 22 volume.
TABLE 1 contains a theoretical volume of an average spherical platinum marker 25 relative to that of the hole 22 for a Scaffold A and a Scaffold B.
The larger the marker volume is relative to the hole volume, the more the hole or space 22 must increase in size if the marker 25′ will be flush with the surfaces 22a, 22b. Otherwise, if the volume for the hole 22 does not increase marker material would be left protruding above and/or below the hole 22.
With respect to the different thickness struts of Scaffold A and Scaffold B (TABLE 1) it will be appreciated that an acceptable marker 25 fitting method and/or structure for Scaffold A (thick struts) may not be acceptable for Scaffold B (thin struts). It may be necessary to change the volume and/or shape size of the hole and/or marker, and/or method of attachment of the marker to a hole when a strut thickness is reduced in size, e.g., when there is an about 37% reduction in strut thickness.
There are several dimensional parameters that result in a physical interaction between the strut walls 24 and marker 25 surface sufficient to keep the marker in the hole 25 during scaffold manipulations, such as drug coating, crimping and scaffold expansion. Factors (1)-(3) that affect the physical securement of the marker 25′ in the hole 22 include:
(1) The Interference Fit Between the Marker 25′ and the Walls 24 of the Marker Hole 22. This fit is a function of
(2) The roughness of the marker 25′ surface and surface of the walls 24, or coefficient of static friction between the contacting marker and wall surfaces.
(3) Where a drug-polymer coating is applied (not shown in
With respect to factor (3), in some embodiments an Everolimus/PDLLA coating is applied after the marker 25′ is fit in place. This type of coating can seal in the marker 25. However, an Everolimus/PDLLA coating tends to be thin (e.g., 3 microns on the abluminal surface 22a and 1 micron on the luminal surface 22b), which limits it's out of plane shear strength resisting dislodgment of the marker from the hole.
In some embodiments a polymer strut, bar arm and/or link has a thickness about, or less than about 100 microns, which is less than the wall thickness for known scaffolds cut from tubes. There are several desirable properties or capabilities that follow from a reduction in wall thickness for a scaffold strut; for example, a reduction from the Scaffold A wall thickness to Scaffold B wall thickness. The advantages of using the reduced wall thickness include a lower profile and hence better deliverability, reduced acute thrombogenicity, and potentially better healing. In some embodiments the Scaffold B (100 micron wall thickness) has a pattern of rings interconnected by struts as disclosed in the '673 patent.
In some embodiments it is desirable to use the same size marker 25 for Scaffold B as with Scaffold A, so that there is no difference, or reduction, in radiopacity between the two scaffold types. Reducing the strut thickness, while keeping the marker hole 22 the same size can however result in the marker protruding above and/or below the strut surfaces due to the reduced hole volume. It may be desirable to keep the abluminal and luminal surfaces 25a, 25b of the marker 25′ flush with corresponding surfaces 22a, 22b for Scaffold B, in which case the hole 22 diameter (d) may be increased to partially account for the reduced hole volume resulting from the thinner strut. This is shown in TABLE 1 for Scaffold B, which has a hole diameter greater than the hole diameter for Scaffold A.
With respect to the Factors (1)-(3) it will be appreciated that the substantially frictional force relied on to resist dislodgement of the marker 25′ from the hole 22 reduces as the strut thickness is reduced. When using a fixed sized marker of constant volume, and assuming the marker fills a cylindrical hole, the contact area between the marker and hole sidewall may be expressed in terms of a marker volume and strut thickness, as in EQ. 1.
A=2(πtV)1/2 (EQ. 1)
Where
A=Contact area between marker hole sidewall and marker
t=Strut thickness
V=marker volume
EQ. 1 shows that in a limiting case of the strut 21a thickness becoming very thin (t→0), the marker 25′ becomes more and more like a thin disc, which would have minimal mechanical interaction with the wall 24. Hence the frictional forces between the marker 25′ and wall 24 decreases because the contact area is reduced. Comparing Scaffold A with Scaffold B, the marker 25′ retention force in the hole 22 therefore becomes worse due to the about 37% reduction in strut thickness. Indeed, it may be expected that frictional forces that hold the marker 25′ in the hole reduce by about 20%, which 20% reduction is the surface area reduction of the walls 24 when the strut thickness is reduced by the about 37% (Scaffold A→Scaffold B). This assumes the coefficients of static friction and level of residual hoop stress are otherwise unchanged between Scaffold A and B.
According to another aspect of the disclosure there are embodiments of a strut having a hole for holding a radiopaque marker and methods for securing a marker to a strut. The embodiments address the ongoing need for having a more secure attachment of a marker to a polymer strut. In preferred embodiments the polymer strut has a thickness, or a scaffold comprising the strut is cut from a tube having a wall thickness less than about 160 μm or 150 μm, a wall thickness of about 100 μm or a wall thickness less than 100 μm and while retaining the same size marker as a strut having a thickness between 150-160 μm, so that the radiopacity of the scaffold does not change.
An improved securement of a marker to a hole according to the disclosure includes embodiments having one or more of the following Concepts A through G:
A. Following marker insertion a sealing biodegradable polymer is applied to secure the marker in place (Concept A).
B. The strut hole is made in an irregular shape to increase an adhesive and mechanical locking effect of a scaffold coating (Concept B).
C. The marker has roughened surfaces to increase the coefficient of friction between the polymer walls and marker (Concept C).
D. The holes are made concave to increase the contact area and/or to provide a mechanical engagement between the marker and the hole (Concept D).
E. Radiopaque markers shaped like, or usable as rivets are attached to the hole (Concept E).
F. Polygonal or Irregular markers (Concept F).
G. Snap-in markers (Concept G).
According to Concept A, sealing layers of polymer 30 are applied to the abluminal and/or luminal surfaces 22a, 22b of the strut 21a near the marker 25′ and luminal and abluminal surfaces 25a, 25b surfaces of the marker 25′ as shown in
The sealing polymer 30 may be applied in different ways. One approach is to apply a small amount of solution consisting of a biodegradable polymer dissolved in solvent. This can be done with a fine needle attached to a micro-syringe pump dispenser. The solution could be applied to both the abluminal and luminal surfaces of the marker and the link strut rim surrounding the hole 22 (
Alternatively, the sealing polymer may be applied in a molten state. As compared to the solvent application embodiment of the sealing polymer, a polymer applied in the molten state may produce a more sizable bump or protrusion on the abluminal and/or luminal surface 22a, 22b. While avoidance of bumps on these surfaces is generally of concern, small bumps or protrusions are acceptable if they are less than the strut thickness. For example, in some embodiments the bump is less than about 100 microns, or about 85 microns (combined bumps on luminal and abluminal sides). Thus the length of the marker (L′ or L) may be up to about 100 or 85 microns higher than the strut thickness, as in a strut thickness of about 100 or 85 microns.
According to Concept B, the marker hole 22 is modified to increase the adhesive effect of a drug/polymer coating on increasing the marker retention. If larger gaps are made between the marker 25 and wall 24 of the hole 22 more of the coating can become disposed between the marker 25′ and wall 24 of the hole 22. The presence of the coating in this area (in addition to having coating extending over the surfaces 22a, 25a, 22b and 25a) can help to secure the marker 25 in the hole because the surface area contact among the coating, wall 24 and marker 25 is increased. Essentially, the coating disposed within the gaps between the wall 24 and marker 25 can perform more as an adhesive. In addition, the coating filling in around the deformed marker bead can improve retention via mechanical interlocking. Gaps can be made by forming the hole with rectangular, hexagonal or more generally polygonal sides as opposed to a round hole. When a spherical marker 25 is pressed into a hole having these types of walls there will be gaps at each wall corner.
Referring to
According to Concept C the marker can have roughened wall surfaces.
Grooves may be formed as spiral grooves as opposed to grooves that extend straight down (i.e., into the paper in
Any combination of the Concept B and Concept C embodiments are contemplated. A hole may be polygonal such as rectangular, square or hexagonal with the grooves formed on walls. There may be 1, 2, 3, 4, 5-10, a plurality or grooves, grooves every 10, 20, 45, or 10-30 degrees about the perimeter of the hole. “Grooves” refers to either straight grooves (
According to Concept D, a marker hole has a concave surface between upper and lower rims to hold a marker in place. Referring to
In the embodiments, the reflectors 202 having surface 204 can have a frustoconical part for each of the paired holes (
According to Concept E, a marker shaped as a rivet is used in place of the spherical marker 25.
Referring to
The rivet 27 may be attached to the hole 22 of the strut portion 21a by first inserting the rivet 27 into the hole 22 from the bore side of the scaffold so that the head 28 rests on the luminal surface 22b of the strut portion 21a. The scaffold is then slipped over a tight fitting mandrel. With the mandrel surface pressed against the head 28 a tool (e.g., a pin) is used to deform the tail 27b to produce the deformed tail 27b′ in
In some embodiments a rivet is a hollow or solid cylindrical tube and devoid of a pre-made head 28. In these embodiments the tube (solid or hollow) may be first fit within the hole then a pinch tool used to form the head and tail portions of the rivet.
Referring to
Referring to
The pinching tool 60 includes an upper arm 60a and lower arm 60b. The deforming faces of the two arms 60a, 60b are the same. The face includes a deforming face 62a, 62b respectively shaped as an apex, point, hemisphere or convex surface, so that when pressed into the tube the end portions extending above the strut surface 22a, 22b respectively will be pushed outwardly, as shown in
Referring to
The pinching tool 70 includes an upper arm 70a and lower arm 70b. The deforming faces of the two arms 70a, 70b are the same. The faces include a deforming face 72a for arm 70a and deforming face 72b for arm 70b, both of which may be shaped with an apex, point, hemisphere, or convex surface, so that when pressed into the cylinder the end portions extending above the strut surface 22a, 22b respectively will be pushed outwardly, as shown in
According to additional aspects of Concept E there is a process for making radiopaque markers as rivets, mounting the rivets on a scaffold and a scaffold having such markers mounted thereon. A process for making rivet-shaped markers from beads is described first.
As discussed in connection with embodiments of a rivet marker 27 (e.g., rivet 27 and 27′ depicted in
It is desirable to choose the appropriate size of the bead for forming the rivet. According to some embodiments the bead size, or bead volume to use depends on the strut thickness (t), hole diameter (D0), distance between holes (D1) and rim thickness (D2) of the scaffold structure where the rivet will be mounted (e.g., the link struts having holes 22 in
According to the disclosure, stock beads are used to make rivet markers for mounting in scaffold holes 22. In preferred embodiments rivet markers are mounted or engaged with scaffold holes of a strut or link having a thickness (t) that is, e.g., about 100 microns, or between 100 and 150 microns, or between 100 and 120 microns. The steps of a rivet-making process and attachment to a scaffold may be summarized as a six-step process.
STEP 1: select from the stock material a marker bead having a diameter or volume within the desired range, i.e., a diameter or volume suitable for mounting on a scaffold according to the dimensions D0, D1, D2 and t (
STEP 2: deposit the bead selected from Step 1 on a die plate.
STEP 3: cold form the rivet from the bead by pressing the bead into the die plate. At temperatures close to ambient temperature force the bead through the die (e.g., using a plate, mandrel head, pin or tapered ram head) to thereby re-shape the bead into a rivet defined by the die shape and volume of the bead relative to the volume of the die receiving the bead.
STEP 4: remove the formed rivets from the die plate. The formed rivets, which can have a total length of about 190-195 microns and diameter of about 300-305 microns, are removed using a tool having a vacuum tube. The air pressure is adjusted to grip a rivet at, or release it from the tip. The rivet is removed from the die by placing the opening of the vacuum tube over the head of the rivet, reducing the air pressure within the tube to cause the head to adhere to, or become sucked into the tube tip (due to the difference in pressure) and lifting the rivet from the die.
STEP 5: while the rivet remains attached to the tip of the tube, move the rivet to a position above the hole of the scaffold, place the rivet into the hole using the same tool, then increase the air pressure within the tool to ambient air pressure. The rivet is released from the tool.
STEP 6: deform the rivet and/or hole to enhance the engagement or resistance to dislodgment of the marker from the hole., e.g.,
It will be appreciated that according to STEPS 1-6 there is overcome the problem with the handling of non-spherical beads. For instance, the steps 1-6 above, wherein the rivet need not be re-orientated after being formed from a spherical bead, overcomes the problem of orientated spherical beads so that they can be aligned and placed into holes.
Referring to
With reference to
With reference to
TABLES 2 and 3, below, provide examples of rivet dimensions for a rivet intended for being secured within a link hole 22 such as shown in
Values for the die 200 dimensions tp, dp2 and dp1 are 178, 229 and 183. The resulting formed rivet dimensions using die 200 are shown in TABLE 2. As can be appreciated from the results, the shank length (or height) is more than 150% of the link thickness and the rivet head diameter (HD) is significantly larger than the hole 22 diameter. The lower portion of the shank is relied on to form a tail portion of the rivet. The mean and standard deviation for HD, SD, and SL are based on the respective “n” samples of rivets measured.
Values for the die 300 dimensions dcb2 and dcb1 are 305 and 203. The resulting formed rivet dimensions using die 300 are shown in TABLE 3. The mean and standard deviation for HD, SD, HH and SL are based on the respective “n” samples of rivets measured.
In TABLES 2 and 3 “O.D. Rivet head diameter post-swage” refers to the outer diameter of the rivet marker head after the rivet marker is pressed into the scaffold hole.
Discussed now are examples of processes for mounting either of the rivets 127, 137 to the scaffold hole 22. According to some embodiments the rivet shank is placed into the hole 22 from the abluminal or outer side of the scaffold, so that the head sits on the abluminal surface 22a. The rivet may instead be placed from the luminal side of the hole. The rivet is firmly pressed into the hole so that a maximum portion of the shank extends from the luminal or abluminal sides, respectively.
For the rivet 127 after it is placed in the hole 22 the side opposite the head is subjected to a swaging process. With reference to
With reference to
The structure illustrated in
The second process is now described in further detail with reference to
The shape of the deformed shank 137′ and hole 22′ shown in
There are higher push-out forces for scaffold B, even though scaffold A has more surface area for contact with the marker, thus higher frictional forces resisting dislodgment. This result indicates that the deformation that occurs during the swaging process resulting in the deformed rivet marker and hole of
The shape 137′ in
In a preferred embodiment a smooth mandrel 310 surface 310a presses against the surface 137b, as compared to a more rough surface of the head 304 that presses against the surface 137a. In a preferred embodiment the coefficient of friction for the abluminal side was greater than 0.17 or Mu>0.17, whereas the coefficient of friction on the luminal side was less than 0.17 or Mu<0.17. As discussed above, the effect of a difference in the coefficient of friction can be explained by the restraint on shear or later material flow near the end abutting the respective swaging head. If the coefficient of friction is sufficiently low then the surface area expands out laterally, as opposed to being held relatively constant. Thus, since Mu is less on the luminal side there is more lateral flow than on the abluminal side. The result, when combined with use the rivet shape, is believed to be the frustoconical shape as disclosed, e.g., as shown in
With reference to
According to Concept F, an irregular-shaped marker having protruding edges is placed in a lased hole prior to a thermal process that shrinks the lased hole. Polymeric bioresorbable scaffolds may be laser cut from a tube. This thin wall, precision tubing can be fabricated by extrusion and expansion processes that include stretch blow molding. The tubing resulting from such processes is formed by deformation of the polymer, which can result in residual stresses remaining in the tube. Heating the tube above its glass transition temperature (Tg) releases these stresses and can be used advantageously to shrink features such as lased marker bead holes to increase securement of a previously placed radiopaque marker. In an alternative embodiment, the temperature of the scaffold is raised above the Tg of the tube material and the marker placed into the softer, heated polymer. This allows the polymer to become more compliant, or flow and thus allow a marker, particularly an irregularly shaped marker, to interact with the polymer surfaces to a greater degree, thereby raising the frictional forces and/or forming a mechanical fit, depending on the marker type used.
Referring to
According to another aspect of the disclosure there is a heating step for a scaffold following marker placement. In some embodiments this heating step may correspond to a rejuvenation step of the scaffold polymer, prior to crimping, to remove aging effects of the polymer.
Thermal rejuvenation (including thermal treatment of a bioresorbable scaffold above Tg, but below melting temperature (Tm) of the polymer scaffold) prior to a crimping process may reverse or remove the physical ageing of a polymeric scaffold, which may reduce crimping damage (e.g., at the crests of a scaffold) and/or instances of dislodgment of a marker.
According to some embodiments a scaffold is thermally treated, mechanically strained, or solvent treated to induce a rejuvenation or erasure of ageing in a polymer shortly before crimping the scaffold to a balloon and after marker placement. Rejuvenation erases or reverses changes in physical properties caused by physical ageing by returning the polymer to a less aged or even an un-aged state. Physical ageing causes the polymer to move toward a thermodynamic equilibrium state, while rejuvenation moves the material away from thermodynamic equilibrium. Therefore, rejuvenation may modify properties of a polymer in a direction opposite to that caused by physical ageing. For example, rejuvenation may decrease density (increase specific volume) of the polymer, increase elongation at break of the polymer, decrease modulus of the polymer, increase enthalpy, or any combination thereof.
According to some embodiments, rejuvenation is desired for reversal or erasure of physical ageing of a polymer that was previously processed. Rejuvenation is not however intended to remove, reverse, or erase memory of previous processing steps. Therefore, rejuvenation also does not educate or impart memory to a scaffold or tube. Memory may refer to transient polymer chain structure and transient polymer properties provided by previous processing steps. This includes processing steps that radially strengthen a tube from which a scaffold is formed by inducing a biaxial orientation of polymer chains in the tube as described herein.
In reference to a marker—scaffold integrity or resistance to dislodgment during crimping, it has been found that a heating step can help reduce instances where crimping causes dislodgment of a marker. According to some embodiments, any of the foregoing embodiments for a marker held within the scaffold hole 22 can include, after the marker has been placed in the hole, a heating step shortly before crimping, e.g., within 24 hours of crimping. It has been found that the scaffold is better able to retain the marker in the hole 22 following heating. A mechanical strain, e.g. a limited radial expansion, or thermal rejuvenation (raise the scaffold temperature above the glass transition temperature (Tg) of the load-bearing portion of the scaffold polymer for a brief time period) can have a beneficial effect on scaffold structural integrity following crimping and/or after balloon expansion from a crimped state.
In particular, these strain-inducing processes tend to beneficially affect the hole 22 dimensions surrounding the marker when the hole is deformed in the manner discussed earlier in connection with
According to some embodiments the scaffold after marker placement is heated to about 20 degrees, or 30 degrees above the glass transition temperature of the polymer for a period of between 10-20 minutes; more preferably the scaffold load bearing structure (e.g., the portion made from a polymer tube or sheet of material) is a polymer comprising poly(L-lactide) and its temperature is raised to between about 80 and 85 Deg. C for 10-20 minutes following marker placement.
According to some embodiments it has been found that raising the temperature of the scaffold after marker placement re-shaped portions of the hole 22 to improve the fit of the marker in the hole. With reference to
According to Concept G, a snap-in marker is used. Referring to
Platinum, and especially platinum/iridium alloys, are stronger than polymeric materials because they are metals. Many assembly and securement process use snap-fit parts where the tolerances and shapes are designed to hold parts together without fasteners. The main feature of the marker 95 is the head 98 and tail 92 having an enlarged diameter over the shank 95c part. There could be formed on portions 98 and 92 round ridges, or more wedge shaped features. When pressed in, the polymer will deform preferentially allowing the tail 92 or head 98 to pass through, or imbed within the hole to become partially or fully recessed within the hole 22. When the tail 92 or head 98 passes completely through hole 22, the polymer surface 22a or 22b will snap under marker feature 98 or 92, securing it and preventing movement in either direction.
With respect to any of Concepts A through G, the marker material may be platinum, platinum/iridium alloy, iridium, tantalum, palladium, tungsten, niobium, zirconium, or alloys thereof. The marker material may also be of biodegradable metals such as iron, zinc, magnesium, manganese or their alloys.
For some embodiments included under Concept A (e.g., the embodiments shown in
t×(1.2)≤L≤t×(1.8) or 1.2≤(L/t)≤1.8 IE.1
t×(1.1)≤L′≤t×(1.5) or 1.1≤(L′/t)≤1.5 IE.2
t×(1.0)≤L≤t×(1.8) or 1.0≤(L/t)≤1.8 IE.3
t×(1.0)≤L′≤t×(1.5) or 1.0≤(L′/t)≤1.5 IE.4
Where:
t is the average strut, bar arm or link thickness, or wall thickness of the tube from which the scaffold was made. The thickness t may vary between about 80 to 150 microns, 80 to 120 microns, 80 to 110 microns, 80 to 100 microns, or the thickness may be about 100 microns, or the thickness may be up to 130 or 140 microns;
L is an undeformed length of the marker (Concept E); and
L′ is a deformed length of the marker (measured from the abluminal surface portion to the luminal surface portion for Concept E), length of the marker (Concept G), or distance between abluminal and luminal surfaces of a coating and/or polymer fill (Concept A).
Exemplary values for t are about 80 microns to 120 microns, or about 100 microns and L′ or L being between about 100 microns and 150 microns.
The relations IE.1, IE.2, IE.3 and IE.4 reflect a need to maintain a low profile for struts exposed in the bloodstream, while ensuring the marker will be securely held in the strut. The concern addressed here is the degree thrombogenicity of the scaffold, which can be influenced by a strut thickness overall and/or protrusion from a strut surface. Blood compatibility, also known as hemocompatibility or thromboresistance, is a desired property for scaffolds and stents. The adverse event of scaffold thrombosis, while a very low frequency event, carries with it a high incidence of morbidity and mortality. To mitigate the risk of thrombosis, dual anti-platelet therapy is administered with all coronary scaffold and stent implantation. This is to reduce thrombus formation due to the procedure, vessel injury, and the implant itself. Scaffolds and stents are foreign bodies and they all have some degree of thrombogenicity. The thrombogenicity of a scaffold refers to its propensity to form thrombus and this is due to several factors, including strut thickness, strut width, strut shape, total scaffold surface area, scaffold pattern, scaffold length, scaffold diameter, surface roughness and surface chemistry. Some of these factors are interrelated. The effect of strut thickness on acute thrombogenicity has been documented and studied both in vivo and in silico.
The above description of illustrated embodiments of the invention, including what is described in the Abstract, is not intended to be exhaustive or to limit the invention to the precise forms disclosed. While specific embodiments of, and examples for, the invention are described herein for illustrative purposes, various modifications are possible within the scope of the invention, as those skilled in the relevant art will recognize.
These modifications can be made to the invention in light of the above detailed description. The terms used in claims should not be construed to limit the invention to the specific embodiments disclosed in the specification.
| Number | Name | Date | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2697863 | Moser | Dec 1954 | A |
| 3476463 | Kreuzer | Nov 1969 | A |
| 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 |
| 4886870 | D'Amore et al. | 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 |
| 5061281 | Mares 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 |
| 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 | Berg | 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 |
| 5380976 | Couch | Jan 1995 | 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 |
| 5486546 | Mathiesen et al. | Jan 1996 | A |
| 5500013 | Buscemi et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5502158 | Sinclair et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
| 5507799 | Sumiya | Apr 1996 | A |
| 5514379 | Weissleder et al. | May 1996 | A |
| 5525646 | Lundgren et al. | Jun 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 |
| 5565215 | Gref et al. | Oct 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 |
| 5603722 | Phan 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 |
| 5656186 | Mourou et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
| 5667767 | Greff et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5667796 | Otten | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5670161 | Healy et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5670558 | Onishi et al. | Sep 1997 | A |
| 5686540 | Kakizawa | Nov 1997 | A |
| 5693085 | Buirge et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5700286 | Tartaglia et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5700901 | Hurst et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
| 5704082 | Smith | Jan 1998 | 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 |
| 5725572 | Lam et al. | 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 |
| 5741327 | Frantzen | Apr 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 |
| 5770609 | Grainger et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
| 5780807 | Saunders | Jul 1998 | A |
| 5800516 | Fine et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5811447 | Kunz et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
| 5824042 | Lombardi et al. | Oct 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 |
| 6007845 | Domb et al. | Dec 1999 | A |
| 6010445 | Armini et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6015541 | Greff et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
| 6022374 | Imran | Feb 2000 | A |
| 6042606 | Frantzen | Mar 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 |
| 6110483 | Whitbourne | 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 |
| 6123722 | Fogarty 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 |
| 6131266 | Saunders | Oct 2000 | A |
| 6150630 | Perry et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6153252 | Hossainy et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
| 6156062 | McGuinness | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6159951 | Karpeisky et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6160084 | Langer et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
| 6160240 | Momma 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 |
| 6174326 | Kitaoka et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
| 6174329 | Callol et al. | 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 |
| 6206911 | Milo | Mar 2001 | B1 |
| 6210715 | Starling et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
| 6224626 | Steinke | May 2001 | B1 |
| 6228845 | Donovan 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 |
| 6254632 | Wu et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6260976 | Endou et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
| 6273913 | Wright et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6281262 | Shikinami | Aug 2001 | B1 |
| 6283234 | Torbet | Sep 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 |
| 6295168 | Hofnagle et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
| 6303901 | Perry et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
| 6312459 | Huang et al. | Nov 2001 | B1 |
| 6327772 | Zadno-Azizi et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
| 6334871 | Dor et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
| 6355058 | Pacetti et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6361557 | Gittings et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
| 6375826 | Wang et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6379381 | Hossainy et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
| 6387121 | Alt | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6388043 | Langer et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6395326 | Castro et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
| 6402777 | Globerman et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
| 6409752 | Boatman et al. | Jun 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 |
| 6471721 | Dang | Oct 2002 | B1 |
| 6475779 | Mathiowithz et al. | Nov 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 |
| 6506437 | Harish et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6511748 | Barrows | Jan 2003 | B1 |
| 6517888 | Weber | Feb 2003 | B1 |
| 6521865 | Jones et al. | 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 |
| 6563080 | Shapovalov et al. | May 2003 | B2 |
| 6563998 | Farah et al. | May 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 |
| 6582472 | Hart | Jun 2003 | B2 |
| 6585755 | Jackson et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6585765 | Hossainy et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
| 6589227 | Sonderskov | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6592614 | Lenker et al. | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6592617 | Thompson | Jul 2003 | B2 |
| 6613072 | Lau et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6620194 | Ding et al. | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6626936 | Stinson | Sep 2003 | B2 |
| 6626939 | Burnside et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
| 6635269 | Jennissen | Oct 2003 | B1 |
| 6641607 | Hossainy et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 6645243 | Vallana et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
| 6652579 | Cox et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
| 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 |
| 6669722 | Chen 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 |
| 6696667 | Flanagan | Feb 2004 | B1 |
| 6699278 | Fischell et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
| 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 |
| 6780261 | Trozera | Aug 2004 | B2 |
| 6801368 | Coufal et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
| 6805898 | Wu et al. | Oct 2004 | B1 |
| 6818063 | Kerrigan | Nov 2004 | B1 |
| 6822186 | Strassl et al. | Nov 2004 | B2 |
| 6846323 | Yip et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
| 6852946 | Groen et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6858680 | Gunatillake et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
| 6863685 | Davila et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6867389 | Shapovalov et al. | Mar 2005 | B2 |
| 6878758 | Martin et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
| 6891126 | Matile | May 2005 | B2 |
| 6899729 | Cox et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
| 6911041 | Zscheeg | Jun 2005 | B1 |
| 6913762 | Caplice et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
| 6918928 | Wolinsky et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
| 6926733 | Stinson | Aug 2005 | B2 |
| 6943964 | Zhang et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
| 6981982 | Amstrong et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 6981987 | Huxel et al. | Jan 2006 | B2 |
| 7022132 | Kocur | Apr 2006 | B2 |
| 7128737 | Goder et al. | Oct 2006 | B1 |
| 7163555 | Dinh | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7166099 | Devens, Jr. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
| 7226475 | Lenz et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
| 7243408 | Vietmeier | Jul 2007 | B2 |
| 7326245 | Rosenthal et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7331986 | Brown et al. | Feb 2008 | B2 |
| 7500988 | Butaric et al. | Mar 2009 | B1 |
| 7625401 | Clifford et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
| 7776926 | Hossainy et al. | Aug 2010 | B1 |
| 8002817 | Limon | Aug 2011 | B2 |
| 8303644 | Lord et al. | Nov 2012 | B2 |
| 8388673 | Yang et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
| 8539663 | Wang et al. | Sep 2013 | B2 |
| 8752268 | Wu | Jun 2014 | B2 |
| 8808353 | Anukhin et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
| 8882829 | Gladdish, Jr. et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
| 9345597 | Pacetti | May 2016 | B2 |
| 9532888 | Dugan et al. | Jan 2017 | B2 |
| 9700443 | Lumauig et al. | Jul 2017 | B2 |
| 9999527 | Pacetti et al. | Jun 2018 | B2 |
| 20010001317 | Duerig et al. | May 2001 | A1 |
| 20010010003 | Lai | Jul 2001 | A1 |
| 20010021871 | Stinson | Sep 2001 | A1 |
| 20010021873 | Stinson | Sep 2001 | A1 |
| 20010027339 | Boatman et al. | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 20010029398 | Jadhav | Oct 2001 | A1 |
| 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 |
| 20020032486 | Lazarovitz et al. | Mar 2002 | A1 |
| 20020062148 | Hart | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020065553 | Weber | May 2002 | A1 |
| 20020111590 | Davila et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020116050 | Kocur | Aug 2002 | A1 |
| 20020138133 | Lenz et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
| 20020143386 | Davila et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020161114 | Gunatillake et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
| 20020190038 | Lawson | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20020193862 | Mitelberg et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
| 20030004563 | Jackson et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030009235 | Manrique et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028241 | Stinson | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030028245 | Barclay et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030033001 | Igaki | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030039689 | Chen et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
| 20030050688 | Fischell et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030060872 | Gomringer et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
| 20030065355 | Weber | Apr 2003 | A1 |
| 20030069630 | Burgermeister et al. | 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 |
| 20030108588 | Chen | Jun 2003 | A1 |
| 20030121148 | DiCaprio | Jul 2003 | A1 |
| 20030153971 | Chandrasekaran | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030155328 | Huth et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
| 20030171053 | Sanders | Sep 2003 | A1 |
| 20030187495 | Cully et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
| 20030204245 | Brightbill | 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 |
| 20040015228 | Lombardi et al. | Jan 2004 | A1 |
| 20040024449 | Boyle | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040027339 | Schulz | Feb 2004 | A1 |
| 20040044399 | Ventura | Mar 2004 | A1 |
| 20040073291 | Brown et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040078071 | Escamilla et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
| 20040088039 | Lee et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040093077 | White et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098090 | Williams et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040098095 | Burnside et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040102758 | Davila et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
| 20040106985 | Jang | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040106987 | Palasis et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040111149 | Stinson | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040122509 | Brodeur | Jun 2004 | A1 |
| 20040126405 | Sahatjian | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040127970 | Saunders et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143180 | Zhong et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040143317 | Stinson et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
| 20040167610 | Fleming, III | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040167619 | Case et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
| 20040181236 | Eidenschink et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
| 20040204750 | Dinh | Oct 2004 | A1 |
| 20040220662 | Dang et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20040236428 | Burkinshaw et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
| 20050004653 | Gerberding et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050004663 | Llanos et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050015138 | Schuessler et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050021131 | Venkatraman et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
| 20050060025 | Mackiewicz et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
| 20050087520 | Wang et al. | Apr 2005 | A1 |
| 20050107865 | Clifford et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050111500 | Harter et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
| 20050147647 | Glauser et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050154450 | Larson et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050157382 | Kafka et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
| 20050172471 | Vietmeier | Aug 2005 | A1 |
| 20050211680 | Li et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
| 20050222673 | Nicholas | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050234336 | Beckman et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
| 20050283226 | Haverkost | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20050283228 | Stanford | Dec 2005 | A1 |
| 20060025847 | Parker | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060033240 | Weber et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
| 20060120418 | Harter et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
| 20060173528 | Feld et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060195175 | Bregulla | Aug 2006 | A1 |
| 20060204556 | Daniels et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
| 20060241741 | Lootz | Oct 2006 | A1 |
| 20070021834 | Young et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
| 20070038290 | Huang et al. | Feb 2007 | A1 |
| 20070156230 | Dugan et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
| 20070179610 | Biedermann et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070195006 | Frye et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
| 20070266542 | Melsheimer | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070276476 | Llanos et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
| 20070293938 | Gale et al. | Dec 2007 | A1 |
| 20080009938 | Huang et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080015684 | Wu | Jan 2008 | A1 |
| 20080033532 | Dave | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080046072 | Laborde et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080051868 | Cottone et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080051873 | Cottone et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
| 20080132989 | Snow et al. | Jun 2008 | A1 |
| 20080188924 | Prabhu | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080199510 | Ruane et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
| 20080243226 | Fernandez et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
| 20090005848 | Strauss et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090005858 | Young et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
| 20090076594 | Sabaria | Mar 2009 | A1 |
| 20090105761 | Robie | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090112207 | Walker et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
| 20090204203 | Allen et al. | Aug 2009 | A1 |
| 20100004735 | Yang et al. | Jan 2010 | A1 |
| 20100042215 | Stalcup et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
| 20100094405 | Cottone | Apr 2010 | A1 |
| 20110012280 | Deslauriers et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110015743 | Deslauriers et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
| 20110130521 | Thatcher et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110130822 | Cottone | Jun 2011 | A1 |
| 20110190871 | Trollsas et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110190872 | Anukhin et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110208190 | Kumbar et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
| 20110238156 | Tischler et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
| 20110245904 | Pacetti et al. | Oct 2011 | A1 |
| 20110282428 | Meyer et al. | Nov 2011 | A1 |
| 20120042501 | Wang et al. | Feb 2012 | A1 |
| 20120065722 | Pacetti | Mar 2012 | A1 |
| 20120089219 | Fircho et al. | Apr 2012 | A1 |
| 20120271361 | Zhou et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
| 20120290075 | Mortisen et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
| 20130116775 | Roeder et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130131780 | Armstrong et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
| 20130150943 | Zheng et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
| 20130211490 | Sudhir et al. | Aug 2013 | A1 |
| 20130255853 | Wang et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325104 | Wu | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325105 | Wu | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130325107 | Wu | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130331926 | Wu | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20130331927 | Zheng et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
| 20140114394 | Gale et al. | Apr 2014 | A1 |
| 20140128901 | Kang et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140128959 | Gale et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
| 20140200656 | Thomas et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
| 20140364935 | Eli et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
| 20150018934 | Pacetti | Jan 2015 | A1 |
| 20150217029 | Ding et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
| 20160120671 | Higashi et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
| 20160228267 | Pacetti et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160242851 | Lumauig | Aug 2016 | A1 |
| 20160361182 | Lumauig et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
| 20170071764 | Dugan et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
| 20170105856 | Vaughan et al. | Apr 2017 | A1 |
| 20180133034 | Vaughan et al. | May 2018 | A1 |
| 20180280165 | Pacetti et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
| Number | Date | Country |
|---|---|---|
| 1241442 | Jan 2000 | CN |
| 44 07 079 | Sep 1994 | DE |
| 197 31 021 | Jan 1999 | DE |
| 198 56 983 | Dec 1999 | DE |
| 297 24 852 | Feb 2005 | DE |
| 103 61 942 | Jul 2005 | DE |
| 10 2004 045994 | Mar 2006 | 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 |
| 0 583 170 | Feb 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 |
| 0 714 641 | Jun 1996 | EP |
| 0 842 729 | May 1998 | EP |
| 0 970 711 | Jan 2000 | EP |
| 1 210 922 | Jun 2002 | EP |
| 1 277 449 | Jan 2003 | EP |
| 1 479 358 | Nov 2004 | EP |
| 1 523 960 | Apr 2005 | EP |
| 1 570 808 | Sep 2005 | EP |
| 1 591 079 | Nov 2005 | EP |
| 1 656 905 | May 2006 | EP |
| 2 438 891 | Apr 2012 | EP |
| 2 752 173 | Jul 2014 | EP |
| 2 247 696 | Mar 1992 | GB |
| 04-033791 | Feb 1992 | JP |
| 07-124766 | May 1995 | JP |
| 10-166156 | Jun 1998 | JP |
| 2002-233578 | Aug 2002 | JP |
| 2003-053577 | Feb 2003 | JP |
| 2004-358242 | Dec 2004 | JP |
| 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 9527587 | Oct 1995 | WO |
| WO 9529647 | Nov 1995 | WO |
| WO 9804415 | Feb 1998 | WO |
| WO 9903515 | Jan 1999 | WO |
| WO 9916386 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9920429 | Apr 1999 | WO |
| WO 9942147 | Aug 1999 | WO |
| WO 0012147 | Mar 2000 | WO |
| WO 0064506 | Nov 2000 | WO |
| WO 0101890 | Jan 2001 | WO |
| WO 0226162 | Apr 2002 | WO |
| WO 0238325 | May 2002 | WO |
| WO 03015664 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| WO 03015978 | Feb 2003 | WO |
| WO 03047463 | Jun 2003 | WO |
| WO 03057075 | Jul 2003 | WO |
| WO 2004019820 | Mar 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004023985 | Mar 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004062533 | Jul 2004 | WO |
| WO 2004112863 | Dec 2004 | WO |
| WO 2005023480 | Mar 2005 | WO |
| WO 2005082282 | Sep 2005 | WO |
| WO 2007081551 | Jul 2007 | WO |
| WO 2008005524 | Jan 2008 | WO |
| WO 2008101987 | Aug 2008 | WO |
| WO 2014011797 | Jan 2014 | WO |
| WO 2014064180 | May 2014 | WO |
| WO 2014181713 | Nov 2014 | WO |
| Entry |
|---|
| Acquarulo et al., Enhancing Medical Device Performance with Nanocomposite Polymers, Med. Device Link, May 2002, www.devicelink.com/grabber.php3? URL downloaded Mar. 26, 2007, 7 pages. |
| 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”, Fertil Steril. Aug. 1979; 32(2): 197-201. |
| Ansari, “Tubal Reanastomosis Using Absorbable Stent”, Int J Fertil. 1978; 23(4): 242-243. |
| Bull, “Parylene Coating for Medical Applications”, Medical Product Manufacturing News 18, Mar. 1993, 1 page. |
| Casper et al., “Fiber-Reinforced Absorbable Composite for Orthopedic Surgery”, Polym Mater Sci Eng. 1985; 53: 497-501. |
| Detweiler et al., “Gastrointestinal Sutureless Anastomosis Using Fibrin Glue: Reinforcement of the Sliding Absorbable Intraluminal Nontoxic Stent and Development of a Stent Placement Device”, J Invest Surg. Mar.-Apr. 1996; 9(2): 111-130. |
| Detweiler et al., “Sliding, Absorbable, Reinforced Ring and an Axially Driven Stent Placement Device for Sutureless Fibrin Glue Gastrointestinal Anastomisis”, J Invest Surg. Nov.-Dec. 1996; 9(6): 495-504. |
| Detweiler et al., “Sutureless Anastomosis of the Small Intestine and the Colon in Pigs Using an Absorbable Intraluminal Stent and Fibrin Glue”, J Invest Surg. Mar.-Apr. 1995; 8(2): 129-140. |
| Detweiler et al., “Sutureless Cholecystojejunostomy in Pigs Using an Absorbable Intraluminal Stent and Fibrin Glue”, J Invest Surg. Jan.-Feb. 1996; 9(1): 13-26. |
| Devanathan et al., “Polymeric Conformal Coatings for Implantable Electronic Devices”, IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. Nov. 1980; BME-27(11): 671-675. |
| Eidelman et al., “Characterization of Combinatorial Polymer Blend Composition Gradients by FTIR Microspectroscopy”, J Res Natl Inst Stand Technol. Apr. 1, 2004; 109(2): 219-231. |
| Elbert et al., “Conjugate Addition Reactions Combined with Free-Radical Cross-Linking for the Design of Materials for Tissue Engineering”, Biomacromolecules. 2001 Summer; 2(2): 430-41. |
| Fan et al., “Plasma Absorption of Femtosecond Laser Pulses in Dielectrics”, J Heat Transfer. Oct. 22, 2001; 124(2): 275-283. |
| Hahn et al., “Biocompatibility of Glow-Discharge-Polymerized Films and Vacuum-Deposited Parylene”, J Appl Polym Sci. 1984; 38: 55-64. |
| Hahn et al., “Glow Discharge Polymers as Coatings for Implanted Devices”, Biomed Sci Instrum. 1981; 17: 109-111. |
| He et al., “Assessment of Tissue Blood Flow Following Small Artery Welding with an Intraluminal Dissolvable Stent”, Microsurgery. Mar. 1999; 19(3): 148-152. |
| Hoffnagle et al., “Design and performance of a refractive optical system that converts a Gaussian to a flattop beam”, Appl Opt. Oct. 20, 2000; 39(30): 5488-5499. |
| Kajtoch, “Strain in the upsetting process”, Metalurgy and Foundry Engineering 2007; 33(1). |
| Kelley et al., “Totally Resorbable High-Strength Composite Material”, Advances in Biomedical Polymers. 1987; 35: 75-85. |
| Kubies et al., “Microdomain Structure In polylactide-block-poly(ethylene oxide) copolymer films”, Biomaterials. Mar. 2000; 21(5): 529-536. |
| Kutryk et al., “Coronary Stenting: Current Perspectives”, A Companion to the Handbook of Coronary Stents, 1999, pp. 1-16. |
| Martin et al., “Enhancing the biological activity of immobilized osteopontin using a type-1 collagen affinity coating”, J Biomed Mater Res A. Jul. 2004; 70(1): 10-19. |
| 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. Feb. 1996; 30(2): 201-207. |
| Middleton et al., “Synthetic biodegradable polymers as orthopedic devices”, Biomaterials. Dec. 2000; 21(23): 2335-2346. |
| Muller et al., “Advances in Coronary Angioplasty: Endovascular Stents”, Coron Artery Dis. Jul.-Aug. 1990; 1(4): 438-448. |
| Nichols et al., “Electrical Insulation of Implantable Devices by Composite Polymer Coatings”, ISA Trans. 1987; 26(4): 15-18. |
| 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. 2001; 86: 563-569. |
| Pietrzak et al., “Bioabsorbable Fixation Devices: Status for the Craniomaxillofacial Surgeon”, J Craniofac Surg. Mar. 1997; 8(2): 92-96. |
| Pietrzak et al., “Bioresorbable implants—practical considerations”, Bone. Jul. 1996; 19(1 Suppl): 109S-119S. |
| Redman, “Clinical Experience with Vasovasostomy Utilizing Absorbable Intravasal Stent”, Urology. Jul. 1982; 20(1): 59-61. |
| Rust et al., “The Effect of Absorbable Stenting on Postoperative Stenosis of the Surgically Enlarged Maxillary Sinus Ostia in a Rabbit Animal Model”, Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. Dec. 1996; 122(12): 1395-1397. |
| Schatz, “A View of Vascular Stents”, Circulation. Feb. 1989; 79(2): 445-457. |
| Schmidt et al., “Long-Term Implants of Parylene-C Coated Microelectrodes”, Med Biol Eng Comput. Jan. 1988; 26(1): 96-101. |
| Spagnuolo et al., “Gas 1 is induced by VE-cadherin and vascular endothelial growth factor and inhibits endothelial cell apoptosis”, Blood. Apr. 2004; 103(8): 3005-3012. |
| Sun et al., “Inert gas beam delivery for ultrafast laser micromachining at ambient pressure”, J Appl Phys. Jun. 15, 2001; 89(12): 8219-8224. |
| Tamai et al., “Initial and 6-Month Results of Biodegradable Poly-I-Lactic Acid Coronary Stents in Humans”, Circulation. Jul. 2000; 102(4): 399-404. |
| Tsuji et al., “Biodegradable Polymeric Stents”, Curr Interv Cardiol Rep. Feb. 2001; 3(1): 10-17. |
| Völkel et al., “Targeting of immunoliposomes to endothelial cells using a single-chain Fv fragment directed against human endoglin (CD105)”, Biochim Biophys Acta. May 2004; 1663(1-2): 158-166. |
| Von Recum et al., “Degradation of polydispersed poly(L-lactic acid) to modulate lactic acid release”, Biomaterials. Apr. 1995; 16(6): 441-447. |
| Yau et al., “Modern Size-Exclusion Liquid Chromatography”, Wiley-Interscience Publication, 1979, IX-XV. |
| Zhang et al., “Single-element laser beam shaper for uniform flat-top profiles”, Opt Express. Aug. 11, 2003; 11(16): 1942-1948. |
| Extended European Search Report dated Jan. 31, 2017 in European Patent Application No. 16177926.9, 7 pages. |
| Extended European Search Report dated Jun. 3, 2014 in European Patent Application No. 13161281.4, 9 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Dec. 4, 2007 in International Patent Application No. PCT/US2007/015561, 10 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 15, 2007 in International Patent Application No. PCT/US2006/049269, 19 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 29, 2016, for International Application No. PCT/US2016/017333, 13 pages. |
| International Search Report and Written opinion dated Jul. 28, 2016, for International Patent Application No. PCT/US2016/037009, 11 pages. |
| International Preliminary Report on Patentability dated Dec. 21, 2017, in International Patent Application No. PCT/US2016/037009, 8 pages. |
| Office Action dated Aug. 16, 2011 in Japanese Patent Application No. P2008-549504, 6 pages. |
| Office Action dated Jun. 22, 2015 in European Patent Application No. 14200352.4, 7 pages. |
| Office Action dated Mar. 27, 2012 in Japanese Patent Application No. P2008-549504, 6 pages. |
| Office Action dated Mar. 31, 2011 in European Patent Application No. 06848153.0, 4 pages. |
| Communication pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC Exam Report dated Mar. 16, 2020 issued for European Patent Application No. 16732129.8, 3 pages. |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 20200179145 A1 | Jun 2020 | US |
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 15615751 | Jun 2017 | US |
| Child | 16789217 | US | |
| Parent | 14738710 | Jun 2015 | US |
| Child | 15615751 | US |
