4.4 Article

First Prize: Evaluation of the Tensile Strength of the Human Ureter-Preliminary Results

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENDOUROLOGY
卷 28, 期 12, 页码 1470-1473

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/end.2014.0226

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose: Ureteral injuries such as avulsion are directly related to mechanical damage of the ureter. Understanding the tensile strength of this tissue may assist in prevention of iatrogenic injuries. Few published studies have looked at the mechanical properties of the animal ureter and, of those, none has determined the tensile strength of the human ureter. Therefore, the purpose of this work was to determine the tensile strength of the human ureter. Methods: We harvested 11 human proximal ureters from patients who were undergoing nephrectomy for either kidney tumors or nonfunctioning kidney. The specimens were then cut into multiple circumferentially and longitudinally oriented tissue strips for tensile testing. Strips were uniaxially stretched to failure in a tensile testing machine. The corresponding force and displacement were recorded. Finally, stress at failure was noted as the tensile strength of the sample. Circumferential tensile strength was also compared in the proximal and distal regions of the specimens. Results: The tensile strength of the ureter in circumferential and longitudinal orientations was found to be 457.52 +/- 33.74 Ncm(-2) and 902.43 +/- 122.08 Ncm(-2), respectively (P<0.001). The circumferential strength in the proximal portion of the ureter was 409.89 +/- 35.13 Ncm(-2) in comparison with 502.89 +/- 55.85 Ncm(-2) in the distal portion (P=0.08). Conclusions: The circumferential tensile strength of the ureter was found to be significantly lower than the longitudinal strength. Circumferential tensile strength was also lower with more proximal parts of the ureter. This information may be important for the design of intelligent devices and simulators to prevent complications.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据