Biomechanical properties of ruptured versus electively repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm wall tissue

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

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

139 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical properties of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall tissue from patients who experienced AAA rupture with that of those who received elective repair. Methods: Rectangular, circumferentially oriented AAA wall specimens (approximately 2.5 cm × 7 mm) were obtained fresh from the operating room from patients undergoing surgical repair. The width and thickness were measured for each specimen by using a laser micrometer before testing to failure with a uniaxial tensile testing system. The force and deformation applied to each specimen were measured continuously during testing, and the data were converted to stress and stretch ratio. The tensile strength was taken as the peak stress obtained before specimen failure, and the distensibility was taken as the stretch ratio at failure. The maximum tangential modulus and average modulus were also computed according to the peak and average slope of the stress-stretch ratio curve. Results: Twenty-six specimens were obtained from 16 patients (aged 73 ± 3 years [mean ± SEM]) undergoing elective repair of their AAA (diameter, 7.0 ± 0.5 cm). Thirteen specimens were resected from nine patients (aged 73 ± 3 years; P = not significant in comparison to the electively repaired AAAs) during repair of their ruptured AAA (diameter, 7.8 ± 0.6 cm; P = not significant). A significant difference was noted in wall thickness between ruptured and elective AAAs: 3.6 ± 0.3 mm vs 2.5 ± 0.1 mm, respectively (P < .001). The tensile strength of the ruptured tissue was found to be lower than that for the electively repaired tissue (54 ± 6 N/cm2 vs 82 ± 9.0 N/cm2; P = .04). Considering all specimens, no significant correlation was noted between tensile strength and diameter (R = -0.10; P = .55). Tensile strength, however, had a significant negative correlation with wall thickness (R = -0.42; P < .05) and a significant positive correlation with the tissue maximum tangential modulus (R = 0.76; P < .05). Conclusions: Our data suggest that AAA rupture is associated with aortic wall weakening, but not with wall stiffening. A widely accepted indicator for risk of aneurysm rupture is the maximum transverse diameter. Our results suggest that AAA wall strength, in large aneurysms, is not related to the maximum transverse diameter. Rather, wall thickness or stiffness may be a better predictor of rupture for large AAAs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)570-576
Number of pages7
JournalJournal of Vascular Surgery
Volume43
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm
Tensile Strength
Aortic Rupture
Aneurysm
Rupture
Operating Rooms
Lasers

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine
  • Surgery

Cite this

Biomechanical properties of ruptured versus electively repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm wall tissue. / Di Martino, Elena S.; Bohra, Ajay; Vande Geest, Jonathan P; Gupta, Navyash; Makaroun, Michel S.; Vorp, David A.

In: Journal of Vascular Surgery, Vol. 43, No. 3, 03.2006, p. 570-576.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Di Martino, Elena S. ; Bohra, Ajay ; Vande Geest, Jonathan P ; Gupta, Navyash ; Makaroun, Michel S. ; Vorp, David A. / Biomechanical properties of ruptured versus electively repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm wall tissue. In: Journal of Vascular Surgery. 2006 ; Vol. 43, No. 3. pp. 570-576.
@article{8e8fd7fe0bd34e9e85b86ecfdde28761,
title = "Biomechanical properties of ruptured versus electively repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm wall tissue",
abstract = "Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical properties of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall tissue from patients who experienced AAA rupture with that of those who received elective repair. Methods: Rectangular, circumferentially oriented AAA wall specimens (approximately 2.5 cm × 7 mm) were obtained fresh from the operating room from patients undergoing surgical repair. The width and thickness were measured for each specimen by using a laser micrometer before testing to failure with a uniaxial tensile testing system. The force and deformation applied to each specimen were measured continuously during testing, and the data were converted to stress and stretch ratio. The tensile strength was taken as the peak stress obtained before specimen failure, and the distensibility was taken as the stretch ratio at failure. The maximum tangential modulus and average modulus were also computed according to the peak and average slope of the stress-stretch ratio curve. Results: Twenty-six specimens were obtained from 16 patients (aged 73 ± 3 years [mean ± SEM]) undergoing elective repair of their AAA (diameter, 7.0 ± 0.5 cm). Thirteen specimens were resected from nine patients (aged 73 ± 3 years; P = not significant in comparison to the electively repaired AAAs) during repair of their ruptured AAA (diameter, 7.8 ± 0.6 cm; P = not significant). A significant difference was noted in wall thickness between ruptured and elective AAAs: 3.6 ± 0.3 mm vs 2.5 ± 0.1 mm, respectively (P < .001). The tensile strength of the ruptured tissue was found to be lower than that for the electively repaired tissue (54 ± 6 N/cm2 vs 82 ± 9.0 N/cm2; P = .04). Considering all specimens, no significant correlation was noted between tensile strength and diameter (R = -0.10; P = .55). Tensile strength, however, had a significant negative correlation with wall thickness (R = -0.42; P < .05) and a significant positive correlation with the tissue maximum tangential modulus (R = 0.76; P < .05). Conclusions: Our data suggest that AAA rupture is associated with aortic wall weakening, but not with wall stiffening. A widely accepted indicator for risk of aneurysm rupture is the maximum transverse diameter. Our results suggest that AAA wall strength, in large aneurysms, is not related to the maximum transverse diameter. Rather, wall thickness or stiffness may be a better predictor of rupture for large AAAs.",
author = "{Di Martino}, {Elena S.} and Ajay Bohra and {Vande Geest}, {Jonathan P} and Navyash Gupta and Makaroun, {Michel S.} and Vorp, {David A.}",
year = "2006",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1016/j.jvs.2005.10.072",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "43",
pages = "570--576",
journal = "Journal of Vascular Surgery",
issn = "0741-5214",
publisher = "Mosby Inc.",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Biomechanical properties of ruptured versus electively repaired abdominal aortic aneurysm wall tissue

AU - Di Martino, Elena S.

AU - Bohra, Ajay

AU - Vande Geest, Jonathan P

AU - Gupta, Navyash

AU - Makaroun, Michel S.

AU - Vorp, David A.

PY - 2006/3

Y1 - 2006/3

N2 - Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical properties of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall tissue from patients who experienced AAA rupture with that of those who received elective repair. Methods: Rectangular, circumferentially oriented AAA wall specimens (approximately 2.5 cm × 7 mm) were obtained fresh from the operating room from patients undergoing surgical repair. The width and thickness were measured for each specimen by using a laser micrometer before testing to failure with a uniaxial tensile testing system. The force and deformation applied to each specimen were measured continuously during testing, and the data were converted to stress and stretch ratio. The tensile strength was taken as the peak stress obtained before specimen failure, and the distensibility was taken as the stretch ratio at failure. The maximum tangential modulus and average modulus were also computed according to the peak and average slope of the stress-stretch ratio curve. Results: Twenty-six specimens were obtained from 16 patients (aged 73 ± 3 years [mean ± SEM]) undergoing elective repair of their AAA (diameter, 7.0 ± 0.5 cm). Thirteen specimens were resected from nine patients (aged 73 ± 3 years; P = not significant in comparison to the electively repaired AAAs) during repair of their ruptured AAA (diameter, 7.8 ± 0.6 cm; P = not significant). A significant difference was noted in wall thickness between ruptured and elective AAAs: 3.6 ± 0.3 mm vs 2.5 ± 0.1 mm, respectively (P < .001). The tensile strength of the ruptured tissue was found to be lower than that for the electively repaired tissue (54 ± 6 N/cm2 vs 82 ± 9.0 N/cm2; P = .04). Considering all specimens, no significant correlation was noted between tensile strength and diameter (R = -0.10; P = .55). Tensile strength, however, had a significant negative correlation with wall thickness (R = -0.42; P < .05) and a significant positive correlation with the tissue maximum tangential modulus (R = 0.76; P < .05). Conclusions: Our data suggest that AAA rupture is associated with aortic wall weakening, but not with wall stiffening. A widely accepted indicator for risk of aneurysm rupture is the maximum transverse diameter. Our results suggest that AAA wall strength, in large aneurysms, is not related to the maximum transverse diameter. Rather, wall thickness or stiffness may be a better predictor of rupture for large AAAs.

AB - Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the biomechanical properties of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall tissue from patients who experienced AAA rupture with that of those who received elective repair. Methods: Rectangular, circumferentially oriented AAA wall specimens (approximately 2.5 cm × 7 mm) were obtained fresh from the operating room from patients undergoing surgical repair. The width and thickness were measured for each specimen by using a laser micrometer before testing to failure with a uniaxial tensile testing system. The force and deformation applied to each specimen were measured continuously during testing, and the data were converted to stress and stretch ratio. The tensile strength was taken as the peak stress obtained before specimen failure, and the distensibility was taken as the stretch ratio at failure. The maximum tangential modulus and average modulus were also computed according to the peak and average slope of the stress-stretch ratio curve. Results: Twenty-six specimens were obtained from 16 patients (aged 73 ± 3 years [mean ± SEM]) undergoing elective repair of their AAA (diameter, 7.0 ± 0.5 cm). Thirteen specimens were resected from nine patients (aged 73 ± 3 years; P = not significant in comparison to the electively repaired AAAs) during repair of their ruptured AAA (diameter, 7.8 ± 0.6 cm; P = not significant). A significant difference was noted in wall thickness between ruptured and elective AAAs: 3.6 ± 0.3 mm vs 2.5 ± 0.1 mm, respectively (P < .001). The tensile strength of the ruptured tissue was found to be lower than that for the electively repaired tissue (54 ± 6 N/cm2 vs 82 ± 9.0 N/cm2; P = .04). Considering all specimens, no significant correlation was noted between tensile strength and diameter (R = -0.10; P = .55). Tensile strength, however, had a significant negative correlation with wall thickness (R = -0.42; P < .05) and a significant positive correlation with the tissue maximum tangential modulus (R = 0.76; P < .05). Conclusions: Our data suggest that AAA rupture is associated with aortic wall weakening, but not with wall stiffening. A widely accepted indicator for risk of aneurysm rupture is the maximum transverse diameter. Our results suggest that AAA wall strength, in large aneurysms, is not related to the maximum transverse diameter. Rather, wall thickness or stiffness may be a better predictor of rupture for large AAAs.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33644690011&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33644690011&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.10.072

DO - 10.1016/j.jvs.2005.10.072

M3 - Article

C2 - 16520175

AN - SCOPUS:33644690011

VL - 43

SP - 570

EP - 576

JO - Journal of Vascular Surgery

JF - Journal of Vascular Surgery

SN - 0741-5214

IS - 3

ER -