Literature DB >> 16520175

Biomechanical properties of ruptured versus electively repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm wall tissue.

Elena S Di Martino1, Ajay Bohra, Jonathan P Vande Geest, Navyash Gupta, Michel S Makaroun, David A Vorp.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical properties of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall tissue from patients who experienced AAA rupture with that of those who received elective repair.
METHODS: Rectangular, circumferentially oriented AAA wall specimens (approximately 2.5 cm x 7 mm) were obtained fresh from the operating room from patients undergoing surgical repair. The width and thickness were measured for each specimen by using a laser micrometer before testing to failure with a uniaxial tensile testing system. The force and deformation applied to each specimen were measured continuously during testing, and the data were converted to stress and stretch ratio. The tensile strength was taken as the peak stress obtained before specimen failure, and the distensibility was taken as the stretch ratio at failure. The maximum tangential modulus and average modulus were also computed according to the peak and average slope of the stress-stretch ratio curve.
RESULTS: Twenty-six specimens were obtained from 16 patients (aged 73 +/- 3 years [mean +/- SEM]) undergoing elective repair of their AAA (diameter, 7.0 +/- 0.5 cm). Thirteen specimens were resected from nine patients (aged 73 +/- 3 years; P = not significant in comparison to the electively repaired AAAs) during repair of their ruptured AAA (diameter, 7.8 +/- 0.6 cm; P = not significant). A significant difference was noted in wall thickness between ruptured and elective AAAs: 3.6 +/- 0.3 mm vs 2.5 +/- 0.1 mm, respectively (P < .001). The tensile strength of the ruptured tissue was found to be lower than that for the electively repaired tissue (54 +/- 6 N/cm2 vs 82 +/- 9.0 N/cm2; P = .04). Considering all specimens, no significant correlation was noted between tensile strength and diameter (R = -0.10; P = .55). Tensile strength, however, had a significant negative correlation with wall thickness (R = -0.42; P < .05) and a significant positive correlation with the tissue maximum tangential modulus (R = 0.76; P < .05).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest that AAA rupture is associated with aortic wall weakening, but not with wall stiffening. A widely accepted indicator for risk of aneurysm rupture is the maximum transverse diameter. Our results suggest that AAA wall strength, in large aneurysms, is not related to the maximum transverse diameter. Rather, wall thickness or stiffness may be a better predictor of rupture for large AAAs.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16520175     DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.10.072

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Vasc Surg        ISSN: 0741-5214            Impact factor:   4.268


  45 in total

1.  Association of Intraluminal Thrombus, Hemodynamic Forces, and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Expansion Using Longitudinal CT Images.

Authors:  Byron A Zambrano; Hamidreza Gharahi; ChaeYoung Lim; Farhad A Jaberi; Jongeun Choi; Whal Lee; Seungik Baek
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2015-10-01       Impact factor: 3.934

2.  Quantitative assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysm geometry.

Authors:  Judy Shum; Giampaolo Martufi; Elena Di Martino; Christopher B Washington; Joseph Grisafi; Satish C Muluk; Ender A Finol
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2010-10-02       Impact factor: 3.934

Review 3.  Biomechanics of abdominal aortic aneurysm.

Authors:  David A Vorp
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2007-01-24       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Are periods of low atmospheric pressure associated with an increased risk of abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture?

Authors:  R A Smith; P R Edwards; A F Da Silva
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 1.891

5.  A robust approach for exploring hemodynamics and thrombus growth associations in abdominal aortic aneurysms.

Authors:  Konstantinos Tzirakis; Yiannis Kamarianakis; Eleni Metaxa; Nikolaos Kontopodis; Christos V Ioannou; Yannis Papaharilaou
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2017-01-02       Impact factor: 2.602

6.  Computational Growth and Remodeling of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Constrained by the Spine.

Authors:  Mehdi Farsad; Shahrokh Zeinali-Davarani; Jongeun Choi; Seungik Baek
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2015-09       Impact factor: 2.097

7.  Microstructure and mechanics of healthy and aneurysmatic abdominal aortas: experimental analysis and modelling.

Authors:  Justyna A Niestrawska; Christian Viertler; Peter Regitnig; Tina U Cohnert; Gerhard Sommer; Gerhard A Holzapfel
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2016-11       Impact factor: 4.118

8.  The Association Between Geometry and Wall Stress in Emergently Repaired Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

Authors:  Sathyajeeth S Chauhan; Carlos A Gutierrez; Mirunalini Thirugnanasambandam; Victor De Oliveira; Satish C Muluk; Mark K Eskandari; Ender A Finol
Journal:  Ann Biomed Eng       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 3.934

9.  Acoustic response of compliable microvessels containing ultrasound contrast agents.

Authors:  Shengping Qin; Katherine W Ferrara
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2006-09-22       Impact factor: 3.609

Review 10.  Biomechanical Rupture Risk Assessment: A Consistent and Objective Decision-Making Tool for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Patients.

Authors:  T Christian Gasser
Journal:  Aorta (Stamford)       Date:  2016-04-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.