Literature DB >> 25542592

Finite element analysis in asymptomatic, symptomatic, and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms: in search of new rupture risk predictors.

P Erhart1, A Hyhlik-Dürr1, P Geisbüsch1, D Kotelis1, M Müller-Eschner2, T C Gasser3, H von Tengg-Kobligk4, D Böckler1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare biomechanical rupture risk parameters of asymptomatic, symptomatic and ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) using finite element analysis (FEA). STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective biomechanical single center analysis of asymptomatic, symptomatic, and ruptured AAAs. Comparison of biomechanical parameters from FEA.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2011 to 2013 computed tomography angiography (CTA) data from 30 asymptomatic, 15 symptomatic, and 15 ruptured AAAs were collected consecutively. FEA was performed according to the successive steps of AAA vessel reconstruction, segmentation and finite element computation. Biomechanical parameters Peak Wall Rupture Risk Index (PWRI), Peak Wall Stress (PWS), and Rupture Risk Equivalent Diameter (RRED) were compared among the three subgroups.
RESULTS: PWRI differentiated between asymptomatic and symptomatic AAAs (p < .0004) better than PWS (p < .1453). PWRI-dependent RRED was higher in the symptomatic subgroup compared with the asymptomatic subgroup (p < .0004). Maximum AAA external diameters were comparable between the two groups (p < .1355). Ruptured AAAs showed the highest values for external diameter, total intraluminal thrombus volume, PWS, RRED, and PWRI compared with asymptomatic and symptomatic AAAs. In contrast with symptomatic and ruptured AAAs, none of the asymptomatic patients had a PWRI value >1.0. This threshold value might identify patients at imminent risk of rupture.
CONCLUSIONS: From different FEA derived parameters, PWRI distinguishes most precisely between asymptomatic and symptomatic AAAs. If elevated, this value may represent a negative prognostic factor for asymptomatic AAAs.
Copyright © 2014 European Society for Vascular Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Abdominal aortic aneurysm; Aorta; Finite element analysis (FEA); Rupture risk; Wall stress

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25542592     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2014.11.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg        ISSN: 1078-5884            Impact factor:   7.069


  18 in total

1.  A machine learning approach to investigate the relationship between shape features and numerically predicted risk of ascending aortic aneurysm.

Authors:  Liang Liang; Minliang Liu; Caitlin Martin; John A Elefteriades; Wei Sun
Journal:  Biomech Model Mechanobiol       Date:  2017-04-06

2.  On the relative impact of intraluminal thrombus heterogeneity on abdominal aortic aneurysm mechanics.

Authors:  Joseph Leach; Evan Kao; Chengcheng Zhu; David Saloner; Michael D Hope
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2019-06-29       Impact factor: 2.097

Review 3.  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

4.  The correlation between computed tomography and duplex evaluation of autogenous vein bypass grafts and their relationship to failure.

Authors:  Jonathan Rehfuss; Salvatore Scali; Yong He; Bradley Schmit; Kenneth Desart; Peter Nelson; Scott Berceli
Journal:  J Vasc Surg       Date:  2015-09-10       Impact factor: 4.268

5.  Biomechanical rupture risk assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysms based on a novel probabilistic rupture risk index.

Authors:  Stanislav Polzer; T Christian Gasser
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2015-12-06       Impact factor: 4.118

6.  A Geodesics-Based Surface Parameterization to Assess Aneurysm Progression.

Authors:  Ly Phan; Katherine Courchaine; Amir Azarbal; David Vorp; Cindy Grimm; Sandra Rugonyi
Journal:  J Biomech Eng       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 2.097

Review 7.  Ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm-epidemiology, predisposing factors, and biology.

Authors:  Thomas Schmitz-Rixen; M Keese; M Hakimi; A Peters; D Böckler; K Nelson; R T Grundmann
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 8.  Computational fluid dynamics modelling in cardiovascular medicine.

Authors:  Paul D Morris; Andrew Narracott; Hendrik von Tengg-Kobligk; Daniel Alejandro Silva Soto; Sarah Hsiao; Angela Lungu; Paul Evans; Neil W Bressloff; Patricia V Lawford; D Rodney Hose; Julian P Gunn
Journal:  Heart       Date:  2015-10-28       Impact factor: 5.994

Review 9.  The - Not So - Solid 5.5 cm Threshold for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Repair: Facts, Misinterpretations, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Nikolaos Kontopodis; Dimitrios Pantidis; Athansios Dedes; Nikolaos Daskalakis; Christos V Ioannou
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2016-01-25

Review 10.  A Review of Computational Methods to Predict the Risk of Rupture of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

Authors:  Tejas Canchi; S D Kumar; E Y K Ng; Sriram Narayanan
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2015-10-05       Impact factor: 3.411

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.