| Literature DB >> 34012762 |
Shengmao Lin1, Pengfei Dong2, Changchun Zhou3, Luis Augusto P Dallan4, Vladislav N Zimin4, Gabriel T R Pereira4, Juhwan Lee5, Yazan Gharaibeh5, David L Wilson5, Hiram G Bezerra6, Linxia Gu2.
Abstract
In this work, a strain-based degradation model was implemented and validated to better understand the dynamic interactions between the bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) and the artery during the degradation process. Integrating the strain-modulated degradation equation into commercial finite element codes allows a better control and visualization of local mechanical parameters. Both strut thinning and discontinuity of the stent struts within an artery were captured and visualized. The predicted results in terms of mass loss and fracture locations were validated by the documented experimental observations. In addition, results suggested that the heterogeneous degradation of the stent depends on its strain distribution following deployment. Degradation is faster at the locations with higher strains and resulted in the strut thinning and discontinuity, which contributes to the continuous mass loss, and the reduced contact force between the BVS and artery. A nonlinear relationship between the maximum principal strain of the stent and the fracture time was obtained, which could be transformed to predict the degradation process of the BVS in different mechanical environments. The developed computational model provided more insights into the degradation process, which could complement the discrete experimental data for improving the design and clinical management of the BVS.Entities:
Keywords: bioresorbable vascular scaffold; coronary artery; degradation; finite element method; percutaneous coronary intervention; poly-l-lactide acid; stent
Year: 2020 PMID: 34012762 PMCID: PMC8130847 DOI: 10.1515/ntrev-2020-0093
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanotechnol Rev ISSN: 2191-9089 Impact factor: 7.848
Figure 1:(a) Representative segment of PLLA stent. (b) Finite element model of PLLA stent segment in an artery.
Coefficients of the degradation constitutive model
| Coefficients | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 0.385 | 0.152 | 0.616 | 0.342 | 0.236 |
Figure 2:Degradation model of the PLLA material. (a) Degradation degree depends on the maximum principal strain and time. (b) Fracture strain reduced with a larger degradation degree.
Hyperelastic coefficients of the artery model
| Coefficients | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Value | 6.52 × 10−3 | 4.89 × 10−2 | 9.26 × 10−3 | 0.76 | −0.43 | 8.69 × 10−2 |
Figure 3:Stenting procedure before degradation. (a) The stent was crimped to an outer diameter of 2.5 mm. (b) The stent relaxed to an outer diameter of 2.65 mm at its crimped state. (c) The stent was fully expanded to an outer diameter of 3.5 mm. (d) The stent recoiled back with an outer diameter of 3.28 mm (only half of the vessel was shown for clear illustration).
Figure 4:Contour of degradation degree at (a) 0 month, (b) first month, (c) second month, (d) third month, (e) fourth month, (f) fifth month, and (g) sixth month. (h) Maximum principal strain versus fracture strain at six representative elements
Figure 5:Contour of maximum principal strain at (a) 0 month, (b) first month, (c) second month, (d) third month, (e) fourth month, (f) fifth month, and (g) sixth month. (h) Strain histogram and the mass loss ratio of the stent.
Figure 6:Dynamic stent–artery interaction during degradation. (a–g) Contour of von-Mises stress of artery at (a) 0 month, (b) first month, (c) second month, (d) third month, (e) fourth month, (f) fifth month, and (g) sixth month. (h) Change in vessel diameter and contact force.