4.4 Article

Platelet activation due to hemodynamic shear stresses: Damage accumulation model and comparison to in vitro measurements

期刊

ASAIO JOURNAL
卷 54, 期 1, 页码 64-72

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/MAT.0b013e31815d6898

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [R01 EB008004, R01 EB008004-01, R01 EB008004-02] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF BIOMEDICAL IMAGING AND BIOENGINEERING [R01EB008004] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The need to optimize the thrombogenic performance of blood recirculating cardiovascular devices, e.g., prosthetic heart valves (PHV) and ventricular assist devices (VAD), is accentuated by the fact that most of them require lifelong anticoagulation therapy that does not eliminate the risk of thromboembolic complications. The formation of thromboemboli in the flow field of these devices is potentiated by contact with foreign surfaces and regional flow phenomena that stimulate blood clotting, especially platelets. With the lack of appropriate methodology, device manufacturers do not specifically optimize for thrombogenic performance. Such optimization can be facilitated by formulating a robust numerical methodology with predictive capabilities of flow-induced platelet activation. In this study, a phenomenological model for platelet cumulative damage, identified by means of genetic algorithms (GAs), was correlated with in vitro experiments conducted in a Hemodynamic Shearing Device (HSD). Platelets were uniformly exposed to flow shear representing the lower end of the stress levels encountered in devices, and platelet activity state (PAS) was measured in response to six dynamic shear stress waveforms representing repeated passages through a device, and correlated to the predictions of the damage accumulation model. Experimental results demonstrated an increase in PAS with a decrease in relaxation time between pulses. The model predictions were in very good agreement with the experimental results.

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