4.4 Article

On stress in abdominal aortic aneurysm: Linear versus non-linear analysis and aneurysms rupture risk

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/cnm.3554

Keywords

abdominal aortic aneurysm; finite element method; patient-specific modelling; rupture; stress

Funding

  1. Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship, University of Western Australia
  2. Czech Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports [LTAUSA18134]
  3. IT4Innovations National Supercomputing Center [LM2015070]
  4. National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) [APP2001689]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, two simulation and modelling methods for predicting stress within arterial walls of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) were compared. The non-linear iterative method showed higher peak maximum principal stress and lower stress magnitude in low stress areas compared to the linear method, especially in areas with large AAA curvature. However, both methods performed similarly in distinguishing between AAAs that would rupture and remain intact.
We present comprehensive biomechanical analyses of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) for 43 patients. We compare stress magnitudes and stress distributions within arterial walls of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) obtained using two simulation and modelling methods: (a) Fully automated and computationally very efficient linear method embedded in the software platform Biomechanics based Prediction of Aneurysm Rupture Risk (BioPARR), freely available from ; (b) More complex and much more computationally demanding Non-Linear Iterative Stress Analysis (Non-LISA) that uses a non-linear inverse iterative approach and strongly non-linear material model. Both methods predicted localised high stress zones with over 90% of AAA model volume fraction subjected to stress below 20% of the 99th percentile maximum principal stress. However, for the non-linear iterative method, the peak maximum principal stress (and 99th percentile maximum principal stress) was higher and the stress magnitude in the low stress area lower than for the automated linear method embedded in BioPARR. Differences between the stress distributions obtained using the two methods tended to be particularly pronounced in the areas where the AAA curvature was large. Performance of the selected characteristic features of the stress fields (we used 99th percentile maximum principal stress) obtained using BioPARR and Non-LISA in distinguishing between the AAAs that would rupture and remain intact was for practical purposes the same for both methods.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available