A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment: Demonstrative application

Jonathan P Vande Geest, Elena S. Di Martino, Ajay Bohra, Michel S. Makaroun, David A. Vorp

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

123 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) can typically remain stable until the strength of the aorticwall is unable to withstand the forces acting on it as a result of the luminal blood pressure, resulting in AAA rupture. The clinical treatment of AAA patients presents a dilemma for the surgeon: surgery should only be recommended when the risk of rupture of the AAA outweighs the risks associated with the interventional procedure. Since AAA rupture occurs when the stress acting on the wall exceeds its strength, the assessment of AAA rupture should include estimates of both wall stress and wall strength distributions. The present work details a method for noninvasively assessing the rupture potential of AAAs using patient-specific estimations the rupture potential index (RPI) of the AAA, calculated as the ratio of locally acting wall stress to strength. The RPI was calculated for thirteen AAAs, which were broken up into ruptured (n = 8 and nonruptured (n = 5) groups. Differences in peak wall stress, minimum strength and maximum RPI were compared across groups. There were no statistical differences in the maximum transverse diameters (6.8 ± 0.3 cm vs. 6.1 ± 0.5 cm, p = 0.26) or peak wall stress (46.0 ± 4.3 vs. 49.9 ± 4.0 N/cm2, p = 0.62) between groups. There was a significant decrease in minimum wall strength for ruptured AAA (81.2 ± 3.9 and 108.3 ± 10.2 N/cm2, p = 0.045). While the differences in RPI values (ruptured = 0.48 ± 0.05 vs. nonruptured = 0.36 ± 0.03, respectively; p = 0.10) did not reach statistical significance, the p-value for the peak RPI comparison was lower than that for both the maximum diameter (p = 0.26) and peak wall stress (p = 0.62) comparisons. This result suggests that the peak RPI may be better able to identify those AAAs at high risk of rupture than maximum diameter or peak wall stress alone. The clinical relevance of this method for rupture assessment has yet to be validated, however, its success could aid clinicians in decision making and AAA patient management.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Pages11-21
Number of pages11
Volume1085
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2006

Publication series

NameAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences
Volume1085
ISSN (Print)00778923
ISSN (Electronic)17496632

Fingerprint

Biomechanics
Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
Biomechanical Phenomena
Risk assessment
Rupture
Aortic Rupture
Blood pressure
Surgery
Decision making
Decision Making

Keywords

  • Abdominal aortic aneurysm
  • Rupture
  • Strength
  • Stress

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology(all)

Cite this

Vande Geest, J. P., Di Martino, E. S., Bohra, A., Makaroun, M. S., & Vorp, D. A. (2006). A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment: Demonstrative application. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences (Vol. 1085, pp. 11-21). (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; Vol. 1085). https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1383.046

A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment : Demonstrative application. / Vande Geest, Jonathan P; Di Martino, Elena S.; Bohra, Ajay; Makaroun, Michel S.; Vorp, David A.

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1085 2006. p. 11-21 (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences; Vol. 1085).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Vande Geest, JP, Di Martino, ES, Bohra, A, Makaroun, MS & Vorp, DA 2006, A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment: Demonstrative application. in Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. vol. 1085, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, vol. 1085, pp. 11-21. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1383.046
Vande Geest JP, Di Martino ES, Bohra A, Makaroun MS, Vorp DA. A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment: Demonstrative application. In Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1085. 2006. p. 11-21. (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences). https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1383.046
Vande Geest, Jonathan P ; Di Martino, Elena S. ; Bohra, Ajay ; Makaroun, Michel S. ; Vorp, David A. / A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment : Demonstrative application. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. Vol. 1085 2006. pp. 11-21 (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences).
@inproceedings{30f0a894b40541aba02dc4e5f216d83a,
title = "A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment: Demonstrative application",
abstract = "Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) can typically remain stable until the strength of the aorticwall is unable to withstand the forces acting on it as a result of the luminal blood pressure, resulting in AAA rupture. The clinical treatment of AAA patients presents a dilemma for the surgeon: surgery should only be recommended when the risk of rupture of the AAA outweighs the risks associated with the interventional procedure. Since AAA rupture occurs when the stress acting on the wall exceeds its strength, the assessment of AAA rupture should include estimates of both wall stress and wall strength distributions. The present work details a method for noninvasively assessing the rupture potential of AAAs using patient-specific estimations the rupture potential index (RPI) of the AAA, calculated as the ratio of locally acting wall stress to strength. The RPI was calculated for thirteen AAAs, which were broken up into ruptured (n = 8 and nonruptured (n = 5) groups. Differences in peak wall stress, minimum strength and maximum RPI were compared across groups. There were no statistical differences in the maximum transverse diameters (6.8 ± 0.3 cm vs. 6.1 ± 0.5 cm, p = 0.26) or peak wall stress (46.0 ± 4.3 vs. 49.9 ± 4.0 N/cm2, p = 0.62) between groups. There was a significant decrease in minimum wall strength for ruptured AAA (81.2 ± 3.9 and 108.3 ± 10.2 N/cm2, p = 0.045). While the differences in RPI values (ruptured = 0.48 ± 0.05 vs. nonruptured = 0.36 ± 0.03, respectively; p = 0.10) did not reach statistical significance, the p-value for the peak RPI comparison was lower than that for both the maximum diameter (p = 0.26) and peak wall stress (p = 0.62) comparisons. This result suggests that the peak RPI may be better able to identify those AAAs at high risk of rupture than maximum diameter or peak wall stress alone. The clinical relevance of this method for rupture assessment has yet to be validated, however, its success could aid clinicians in decision making and AAA patient management.",
keywords = "Abdominal aortic aneurysm, Rupture, Strength, Stress",
author = "{Vande Geest}, {Jonathan P} and {Di Martino}, {Elena S.} and Ajay Bohra and Makaroun, {Michel S.} and Vorp, {David A.}",
year = "2006",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1196/annals.1383.046",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "1573316571",
volume = "1085",
series = "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences",
pages = "11--21",
booktitle = "Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - A biomechanics-based rupture potential index for abdominal aortic aneurysm risk assessment

T2 - Demonstrative application

AU - Vande Geest, Jonathan P

AU - Di Martino, Elena S.

AU - Bohra, Ajay

AU - Makaroun, Michel S.

AU - Vorp, David A.

PY - 2006/11

Y1 - 2006/11

N2 - Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) can typically remain stable until the strength of the aorticwall is unable to withstand the forces acting on it as a result of the luminal blood pressure, resulting in AAA rupture. The clinical treatment of AAA patients presents a dilemma for the surgeon: surgery should only be recommended when the risk of rupture of the AAA outweighs the risks associated with the interventional procedure. Since AAA rupture occurs when the stress acting on the wall exceeds its strength, the assessment of AAA rupture should include estimates of both wall stress and wall strength distributions. The present work details a method for noninvasively assessing the rupture potential of AAAs using patient-specific estimations the rupture potential index (RPI) of the AAA, calculated as the ratio of locally acting wall stress to strength. The RPI was calculated for thirteen AAAs, which were broken up into ruptured (n = 8 and nonruptured (n = 5) groups. Differences in peak wall stress, minimum strength and maximum RPI were compared across groups. There were no statistical differences in the maximum transverse diameters (6.8 ± 0.3 cm vs. 6.1 ± 0.5 cm, p = 0.26) or peak wall stress (46.0 ± 4.3 vs. 49.9 ± 4.0 N/cm2, p = 0.62) between groups. There was a significant decrease in minimum wall strength for ruptured AAA (81.2 ± 3.9 and 108.3 ± 10.2 N/cm2, p = 0.045). While the differences in RPI values (ruptured = 0.48 ± 0.05 vs. nonruptured = 0.36 ± 0.03, respectively; p = 0.10) did not reach statistical significance, the p-value for the peak RPI comparison was lower than that for both the maximum diameter (p = 0.26) and peak wall stress (p = 0.62) comparisons. This result suggests that the peak RPI may be better able to identify those AAAs at high risk of rupture than maximum diameter or peak wall stress alone. The clinical relevance of this method for rupture assessment has yet to be validated, however, its success could aid clinicians in decision making and AAA patient management.

AB - Abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) can typically remain stable until the strength of the aorticwall is unable to withstand the forces acting on it as a result of the luminal blood pressure, resulting in AAA rupture. The clinical treatment of AAA patients presents a dilemma for the surgeon: surgery should only be recommended when the risk of rupture of the AAA outweighs the risks associated with the interventional procedure. Since AAA rupture occurs when the stress acting on the wall exceeds its strength, the assessment of AAA rupture should include estimates of both wall stress and wall strength distributions. The present work details a method for noninvasively assessing the rupture potential of AAAs using patient-specific estimations the rupture potential index (RPI) of the AAA, calculated as the ratio of locally acting wall stress to strength. The RPI was calculated for thirteen AAAs, which were broken up into ruptured (n = 8 and nonruptured (n = 5) groups. Differences in peak wall stress, minimum strength and maximum RPI were compared across groups. There were no statistical differences in the maximum transverse diameters (6.8 ± 0.3 cm vs. 6.1 ± 0.5 cm, p = 0.26) or peak wall stress (46.0 ± 4.3 vs. 49.9 ± 4.0 N/cm2, p = 0.62) between groups. There was a significant decrease in minimum wall strength for ruptured AAA (81.2 ± 3.9 and 108.3 ± 10.2 N/cm2, p = 0.045). While the differences in RPI values (ruptured = 0.48 ± 0.05 vs. nonruptured = 0.36 ± 0.03, respectively; p = 0.10) did not reach statistical significance, the p-value for the peak RPI comparison was lower than that for both the maximum diameter (p = 0.26) and peak wall stress (p = 0.62) comparisons. This result suggests that the peak RPI may be better able to identify those AAAs at high risk of rupture than maximum diameter or peak wall stress alone. The clinical relevance of this method for rupture assessment has yet to be validated, however, its success could aid clinicians in decision making and AAA patient management.

KW - Abdominal aortic aneurysm

KW - Rupture

KW - Strength

KW - Stress

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34447619874&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34447619874&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1196/annals.1383.046

DO - 10.1196/annals.1383.046

M3 - Conference contribution

C2 - 17182918

AN - SCOPUS:34447619874

SN - 1573316571

SN - 9781573316576

VL - 1085

T3 - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

SP - 11

EP - 21

BT - Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

ER -