These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Wall stress analyses in patients with ≥5 cm versus <5 cm ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm.
    Author: Wang Z, Flores N, Lum M, Wisneski AD, Xuan Y, Inman J, Hope MD, Saloner DA, Guccione JM, Ge L, Tseng EE.
    Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg; 2021 Nov; 162(5):1452-1459. PubMed ID: 32178922.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines for elective surgery of ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms (aTAAs) use aneurysm size as primary determinant for risk stratification of adverse events. Biomechanically, dissection may occur when wall stress exceeds wall strength. Determining patient-specific aTAA wall stresses by finite element analysis can potentially predict patient-specific risk of dissection. This study compared peak wall stresses in patients with ≥5.0 cm versus <5.0 cm aTAAs to determine correlation between diameter and wall stress. METHODS: Patients with aTAA ≥5.0 cm (n = 47) and <5.0 cm (n = 53) were studied. Patient-specific aneurysm geometries obtained from echocardiogram-gated computed tomography were meshed and prestress geometries determined. Peak wall stresses and stress distributions were determined using LS-DYNA finite element analysis software (LSTC Inc, Livermore, Calif), with user-defined fiber-embedded material models under systolic pressure. RESULTS: Peak circumferential stresses at systolic pressure were 530 ± 83 kPa for aTAA ≥5.0 cm versus 486 ± 87 kPa for aTAA <5.0 cm (P = .07), whereas peak longitudinal stresses were 331 ± 57 kPa versus 310 ± 54 kPa (P = .08), respectively. For aTAA ≥5.0 cm, correlation between peak circumferential stresses and size was 0.41, whereas correlation between peak longitudinal wall stresses and size was 0.33. However, for aTAA <5.0 cm, correlation between peak circumferential stresses and size was 0.23, whereas correlation between peak longitudinal stresses and size was 0.14. CONCLUSIONS: Peak patient-specific aTAA wall stresses overall were larger for ≥5.0 cm than aTAA <5.0 cm. Although some correlation between size and peak wall stresses was found in aTAA ≥5.0 cm, poor correlation existed between size and peak wall stresses in aTAA <5.0 cm. Patient-specific wall stresses are particularly important in determining patient-specific risk of dissection for aTAA <5.0 cm.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]