4.6 Article

Finite element analysis of annuloplasty and papillary muscle relocation on a patient-specific mitral regurgitation model

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 13, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0198331

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [HL104080, HL127570]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives Functional mitral regurgitation (FMR) is a significant complication of left ventricle (LV) dysfunction associated with poor prognosis and commonly treated by undersized ring annuloplasty. This study aimed to quantitatively simulate the treatment outcomes and mitral valve (MV) biomechanics following ring annulopalsty and papillary muscle relocation (PMR) procedures for a FMR patient. Methods We utilized a validated finite element model of the left heart for a patient with severe FMR and LV dilation from our previous study and simulated virtual ring annuloplasty procedures with various sizes of Edwards Classic and GeoForm annuloplasty rings. The model included detailed geometries of the left ventricle, mitral valve, and chordae tendineae, and incorporated age- and gender- matched nonlinear, anisotropic hyperelastic tissue material properties, and simulated chordal tethering at diastole due to LV dilation. Results Ring annuloplasty with either the Classic or GeoForm ring improved leaflet coaptation and increased the total leaflet closing force while increased posterior mitral leaflet (PML) stresses and strains. Classic rings resulted in larger coaptation forces and areas compared to GeoForm rings. The PMR procedure further improved the leaflet coaptation, decreased the PML stress and strain for both ring shapes and all sizes in this patient model. Conclusions This study demonstrated that a rigorously developed patient-specific computational model can provide useful insights into annuloplasty repair techniques for the treatment of FMR patients and could potentially serve as a tool to assist in pre-operative planning for MV repair surgical or interventional procedures.

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

4.6
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