IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/gcmbxx/v25y2022i1p40-51.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Leaflet stress quantification of porcine vs bovine surgical bioprostheses: an in vitro study

Author

Listed:
  • Viktória Stanová
  • Yves Godio Raboutet
  • Paul Barragan
  • Lionel Thollon
  • Philippe Pibarot
  • Régis Rieu

Abstract

Calcified aortic stenoses are among the most prevalent form of cardiovascular diseases in the industrialized countries. This progressive disease, with no effective medical therapy, ultimately requires aortic valve replacement – either a surgical or very recently transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Increase leaflet mechanical stress is one of the main determinants of the structural deterioration of bioprosthetic aortic valves. We applied a coupled in vitro/in silico method to compare the timing, magnitude, and regional distribution of leaflet mechanical stress in porcine versus pericardial bioprostheses (Mosaic and Trifecta). A double activation simulator was used for in vitro testing of a bioprosthesis with externally mounted pericardium (Abbott, Trifecta) and a bioprosthesis with internally mounted porcine valve (Medtronic, Mosaic). A non-contact system based on stereophotogammetry and digital image correlation (DIC) with high spatial and temporal resolution (2000 img/s) was used to visualize the valve leaflet motion and perform the three-dimensional analysis. A finite element model of the valve was developed, and the leaflet deformation obtained from the DIC analysis was applied to the finite element model calculate local leaflet mechanical stress throughout the cardiac cycle. The maximum leaflet stress was higher with the pericardial versus the porcine bioprosthesis (2.03 vs. 1.30 MPa) For both bioprostheses the highest values of leaflet stress occurred during diastole and were primarily observed in the upper leaflet edge near the commissures and to a lesser extent in the mid-portion of the leaflet body. In conclusion, the coupled in vitro/in silico method described in this study shows that the highest levels of leaflet stress occur in the regions of the commissures and mid-portion of the leaflet body. This method may have important insight with regard to bioprosthetic valve durability. Our results suggest that, compared to porcine bioprostheses, those with externally mounted pericardium have higher leaflet mechanical stress, which may translate into shorter durability.

Suggested Citation

  • Viktória Stanová & Yves Godio Raboutet & Paul Barragan & Lionel Thollon & Philippe Pibarot & Régis Rieu, 2022. "Leaflet stress quantification of porcine vs bovine surgical bioprostheses: an in vitro study," Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 40-51, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:25:y:2022:i:1:p:40-51
    DOI: 10.1080/10255842.2021.1928092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10255842.2021.1928092
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/10255842.2021.1928092?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:gcmbxx:v:25:y:2022:i:1:p:40-51. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/gcmb .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.