Barry J Doyle1, Nikhilesh Bappoo2, Maaz B J Syed3, Rachael O Forsythe3, Janet T Powell4, Noel Conlisk3, Peter R Hoskins3, Olivia M B McBride3, Anoop S V Shah3, Paul E Norman5, David E Newby3. 1. Vascular Engineering Laboratory, Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, QEII Medical Centre, Nedlands and Centre for Medical Research, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia; School of Engineering, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia; BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK; Australian Research Council Centre for Personalised Therapeutics Technologies, Australia. Electronic address: https://twitter.com/vasclab_uwa. 2. Vascular Engineering Laboratory, Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, QEII Medical Centre, Nedlands and Centre for Medical Research, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia; School of Engineering, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia. 3. BHF Centre for Cardiovascular Science, The University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK. 4. Vascular Surgery Research Group, Imperial College London, London, UK. 5. Vascular Engineering Laboratory, Harry Perkins Institute of Medical Research, QEII Medical Centre, Nedlands and Centre for Medical Research, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia; Medical School, The University of Western Australia, Perth, Australia.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To test whether aneurysm biomechanical ratio (ABR; a dimensionless ratio of wall stress and wall strength) can predict aneurysm related events. METHODS: In a prospective multicentre clinical study of 295 patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA; diameter ≥ 40 mm), three dimensional reconstruction and computational biomechanical analyses were used to compute ABR at baseline. Participants were followed for at least two years and the primary end point was the composite of aneurysm rupture or repair. RESULTS: The majority were male (87%), current or former smokers (86%), most (72%) had hypertension (mean ± standard deviation [SD] systolic blood pressure 140 ± 22 mmHg), and mean ± SD baseline diameter was 49.0 ± 6.9 mm. Mean ± SD ABR was 0.49 ± 0.27. Participants were followed up for a mean ± SD of 848 ± 379 days and rupture (n = 13) or repair (n = 102) occurred in 115 (39%) cases. The number of repairs increased across tertiles of ABR: low (n = 24), medium (n = 34), and high ABR (n = 44) (p = .010). Rupture or repair occurred more frequently in those with higher ABR (log rank p = .009) and ABR was independently predictive of this outcome after adjusting for diameter and other clinical risk factors, including sex and smoking (hazard ratio 1.41; 95% confidence interval 1.09-1.83 [p = .010]). CONCLUSION: It has been shown that biomechanical ABR is a strong independent predictor of AAA rupture or repair in a model incorporating known risk factors, including diameter. Determining ABR at baseline could help guide the management of patients with AAA.
OBJECTIVE: To test whether aneurysm biomechanical ratio (ABR; a dimensionless ratio of wall stress and wall strength) can predict aneurysm related events. METHODS: In a prospective multicentre clinical study of 295 patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA; diameter ≥ 40 mm), three dimensional reconstruction and computational biomechanical analyses were used to compute ABR at baseline. Participants were followed for at least two years and the primary end point was the composite of aneurysm rupture or repair. RESULTS: The majority were male (87%), current or former smokers (86%), most (72%) had hypertension (mean ± standard deviation [SD] systolic blood pressure 140 ± 22 mmHg), and mean ± SD baseline diameter was 49.0 ± 6.9 mm. Mean ± SD ABR was 0.49 ± 0.27. Participants were followed up for a mean ± SD of 848 ± 379 days and rupture (n = 13) or repair (n = 102) occurred in 115 (39%) cases. The number of repairs increased across tertiles of ABR: low (n = 24), medium (n = 34), and high ABR (n = 44) (p = .010). Rupture or repair occurred more frequently in those with higher ABR (log rank p = .009) and ABR was independently predictive of this outcome after adjusting for diameter and other clinical risk factors, including sex and smoking (hazard ratio 1.41; 95% confidence interval 1.09-1.83 [p = .010]). CONCLUSION: It has been shown that biomechanical ABR is a strong independent predictor of AAA rupture or repair in a model incorporating known risk factors, including diameter. Determining ABR at baseline could help guide the management of patients with AAA.
Authors: Ke Tao; Ming Li; Xuefeng Gu; Ming Wang; Tianwei Qian; Lijun Hu; Jiang Li Journal: Korean J Physiol Pharmacol Date: 2022-09-01 Impact factor: 1.718
Authors: Moritz Lindquist Liljeqvist; Marko Bogdanovic; Antti Siika; T Christian Gasser; Rebecka Hultgren; Joy Roy Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-09-10 Impact factor: 4.379