Development of a novel low-background noise blood loop model for testing blood-contacting biomaterials and medical devices in fresh human blood.

A novel low volume blood loop model (Ension Triad System [ETS]) incorporating pulsatile flow and a proprietary low-activation blood-contacting surface (Ension bioactive surface [EBS]) enabling high signal-to-noise performance is described. The ETS system incorporates a test chamber that allows direct comparison of material samples or finished medical devices such as catheters with varying compositions and/or surface treatments. ETS performance is presented from two independent organizations (Medtronic and MLM Labs) and includes results for hemolysis (pfHgb), platelet count, platelet activation (ßTG), coagulation (TAT), inflammation (PMN Elastase, PMN CD112b, and monocyte CD112b) and immune response (SC5b-9) were made on: (1) the EBS-treated system itself without a test material (No Material, NM); (2) the EBS-treated system with an idealized untreated catheter (UC); and (3) the EBS-treated system with the prototype catheter treated with the EBS surface treatment (CC). The untreated catheter (UC) was associated with significant elevation of all activation marker levels (pfHgb excluded). The EBS-treated catheter, in direct comparison to the UC and NM catheters, appeared invisible with respect to the activation markers (all markers statistically different than the UC and equivalent to the NM control). Based on these data, we conclude that using a relatively small surface area test sample and a small volume of fresh human blood, the high signal-to-noise performance of the ETS system demonstrates comprehensive and statistically significant material differences in the major ISO 10993-4 categories of blood interaction. These data underscore the important benefit of minimal confounding of test/device responses with non-test-material/model-related responses. ETS offers a practical alternative to the common one-test-category-at-a-time approach when assessing blood/medical device interactions.

In vitro methodology for medical device material thrombogenicity assessments: A use condition and bioanalytical proof-of-concept approach.

Device manufacturers and regulatory agencies currently utilize expensive and often inconclusive in vivo vascular implant models to assess implant material thrombogenicity. We report an in vitro thrombogenicity assessment methodology where test materials (polyethylene, Elasthane™ 80A polyurethane, Pebax®), alongside positive (borosilicate glass) and negative (no material) controls, were exposed to fresh human blood, with attention to common blood-contact use conditions and the variables: material (M), material surface modification (SM) with heparin, model (Mo), time (T), blood donor (D), exposure ratio (ER; cm2 material/ml blood), heparin anticoagulation (H), and blood draw/fill technique (DT). Two models were used: (1) a gentle-agitation test tube model and (2) a pulsatile flow closed-loop model. Thrombogenicity measurements included thrombin generation (thrombin-antithrombin complex [TAT] and human prothrombin fragment F1.2), platelet activation (ß-thromboglobulin), and platelet counts. We report that: (a) thrombogenicity was strongly dependent (p < .0001) on M, H, and T, and variably dependent (p < .0001 - > .05) on Mo, SM, and D (b) differences between positive control, test, and negative control materials became less pronounced as H increased from 0.6 to 2.0 U/ml, and (c) in vitro-to-in vivo case comparisons showed consistency in thrombogenicity rankings on materials classified to be of low, moderate, and high concern. In vitro methods using fresh human blood are therefore scientifically sound and cost effective compared to in vivo methods for screening intravascular materials and devices for thrombogenicity.

Thrombogenicity assessment of Pipeline, Pipeline Shield, Derivo and P64 flow diverters in an in vitro pulsatile flow human blood loop model.

Flow diversion is a disruptive technology for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. However, these intraluminal devices pose a risk for thromboembolic complications despite dual antiplatelet therapy. We report the thrombogenic potential of the following flow diversion devices measured experimentally in a novel human blood in-vitro pulsatile flow loop model: Pipeline™ Flex Embolization Device (Pipeline), Pipeline™ Flex Embolization Device with Shield Technology™ (Pipeline Shield), Derivo Embolization Device (Derivo), and P64 Flow Modulation Device (P64). Thrombin generation (Mean ±â€¯SD; µg/mL) was measured as: Derivo (28 ±â€¯11), P64 (21 ±â€¯4.5), Pipeline (21 ±â€¯6.2), Pipeline Shield (0.6 ±â€¯0.1) and Negative Control (1.5 ±â€¯1.1). Platelet activation (IU/µL) was measured as: Derivo (4.9 ±â€¯0.7), P64 (5.2 ±â€¯0.7), Pipeline (5.5 ±â€¯0.4), Pipeline Shield (0.3 ±â€¯0.1), and Negative Control (0.9 ±â€¯0.7). We found that Pipeline Shield had significantly lower platelet activation and thrombin generation than the other devices tested (p < .05) and this was comparable to the Negative Control (no device, p > .05). High resolution scanning electron microscopy performed on the intraluminal and cross-sectional surfaces of each device showed the lowest accumulation of platelets and fibrin on Pipeline Shield relative to Derivo, P64, and Pipeline. Derivo and P64 also had higher thrombus accumulation at the flared ends. Pipeline device with Phosphorylcholine surface treatment (Pipeline Shield) could mitigate device material related thromboembolic complications.

Thrombogenicity assessment of Pipeline Flex, Pipeline Shield, and FRED flow diverters in an in vitro human blood physiological flow loop model.

Endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms with endoluminal flow diverters (single or multiple) has proven to be clinically safe and effective, but is associated with a risk of thromboembolic complications. Recently, a novel biomimetic surface modification with covalently bound phosphorylcholine (Shield Technology™) has shown to reduce the material thrombogenicity of the Pipeline flow diverter. Thrombogenicity of Pipeline Flex, Pipeline Shield, and Flow Redirection Endoluminal Device (FRED) in the presence of human blood under physiological flow conditions-in addition to relative increase in thrombogenicity with multiple devices-remains unknown and was investigated here. Thrombin generation (mean ± SD; µg/mL; thrombin-antithrombin complex or TAT) was measured as FRED (30.3 ± 2.9), Pipeline (13.9 ± 4.4), Pipeline Shield (0.4 ± 0.3), and negative control (no device; 0.1 ± 0.0). Platelet activation (mean ± SD; IU/µL; beta-thromboglobulin or ßTG) was measured as FRED (148 ± 45), Pipeline (92.8 ± 41), Pipeline Shield (16.2 ± 3.5), and negative control (2.70 ± 0.16). FRED was significantly more thrombogenic than Pipeline and Pipeline Shield (p < 0.05) for TAT. Additionally, Pipeline Shield had significantly lower TAT and ßTG than the other devices tested (p < 0.05) and these were comparable to the negative control (p > 0.05). TAT and ßTG scaled proportionately with multiple Pipeline devices (N = 6) but was unaffected by multiple Pipeline Shield (N = 6) devices-the latter being statistically similar to negative control (p > 0.05). © 2018 The Authors. Journal Of Biomedical Materials Research Part A Published By Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Biomed Mater Res Part A: 106A: 3195-3202, 2018.