Computational biomechanics to simulate the femoropopliteal intersection during knee flexion: A preliminary study

Journal of Endovascular Therapy

Volumn 18, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 388-396

  Diehm, Nicolas ^a   Sin, Sangmun ^a   Hoppe, Hanno ^a   Baumgartner, Iris ^a   Büchler, Philippe ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BERN   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Femoropopliteal segment; Finite element analysis; Knee flexion; Lower limb motion; Magnetic resonance angiography; Popliteal artery; Stent design; Stent fracture; Superficial femoral artery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; BODY MASS; EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN; FEMALE; FEMORAL ARTERY; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; KNEE FUNCTION; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; MECHANICAL STRESS; NORMAL HUMAN; POPLITEAL ARTERY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIMULATION; SYSTEMATIC ERROR;

ADULT; BIOMECHANICS; BODY HEIGHT; BODY MASS INDEX; COMPUTER SIMULATION; FEMALE; FEMORAL ARTERY; FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS; HUMANS; KNEE; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MALE; MODELS, CARDIOVASCULAR; MUSCLE CONTRACTION; NUMERICAL ANALYSIS, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; PILOT PROJECTS; POPLITEAL ARTERY; STRESS, MECHANICAL;

EID: 79959304416     PISSN: 15266028     EISSN: 15451550     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1583/10-3337.1     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Norgren L, Hiatt WR, Dormandy JA, et al. Inter-Society Consensus for the Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease (TASC II). J Vasc Surg. 2007;45:S5-S67. (Pubitemid 46151680)
2. The TASC Study Group. Management of peripheral arterial disease. TransAtlantic Inter-Society Consensus (TASC). J Vasc Surg. 2000; 31:1-304.
3. Schillinger M, Sabeti S, Loewe C, et al. Balloon angioplasty versus implantation of nitinol stents in the superficial femoral artery. N Engl J Med. 2006;354:1879-1888. (Pubitemid 43872689)
4. Schillinger M, Sabeti S, Dick P, et al. Sustained benefit at 2 years of primary femoropopliteal stenting compared with balloon angioplasty with optional stenting. Circulation. 2007;115: 2745-2749. (Pubitemid 46842791)
5. Laird JR, Katzen BT, Scheinert D, et al. Nitinol stent implantation versus balloon angioplasty for lesions in the superficial femoral artery and proximal popliteal artery: twelve-month results from the RESILIENT randomized trial. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2010;3:267-276.
6. Schillinger M, Minar E. Past, present and future of femoropopliteal stenting. J Endovasc Ther. 2009;16 Suppl 1:I147-152.
7. Lyden SP, Smouse HB. TASC II and the endovascular management of infrainguinal disease. J Endovasc Ther. 2009;16 Suppl 216: II5-18.
8. Krankenberg H, Schluter M, Steinkamp HJ, et al. Nitinol stent implantation versus percutaneous transluminal angioplasty in superficial femoral artery lesions up to 10 cm in length: the femoral artery stenting trial (FAST). Circulation. 2007;116:285-292. (Pubitemid 47196564)
9. Cheng CP, Wilson NM, Hallett RL, et al. In vivo MR angiographic quantification of axial and twisting deformations of the superficial femoral artery resulting from maximum hip and knee flexion. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17: 979-987.
10. Klein AJ, Chen SJ, Messenger JC, et al. Quantitative assessment of the conformational change in the femoropopliteal artery with legmovement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2009;74:787-798.
11. Scheinert D, Scheinert S, Sax J, et al. Prevalence and clinical impact of stent fractures after femoropopliteal stenting. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2005;45:312-315. (Pubitemid 40094743)
12. Nikanorov A, Smouse HB, Osman K, et al. Fracture of self-expanding nitinol stents stressed in vitro under simulated intravascular conditions. J Vasc Surg. 2008;48:435-440.
13. Arena FJ. Arterial kink and damage in normal segments of the superficial femoral and popliteal arteries abutting nitinol stents-a common cause of late occlusion and restenosis? A single-center experience. J Invasive Cardiol. 2005;17: 482-486.
14. Migliavacca F, Petrini L, Massarotti P, et al. Stainless and shape memory alloy coronary stents: a computational study on the interaction with the vascular wall. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2004;2:205-217. (Pubitemid 40265583)
15. Holzapfel GA, Stadler M, Gasser TC. Changes in the mechanical environment of stenotic arteries during interaction with stents: computational assessment of parametric stent designs. J Biomech Eng. 2005;127:166-180. (Pubitemid 40467606)
16. Wang WQ, Liang DK, Yang DZ, et al. Analysis of the transient expansion behavior and design optimization of coronary stents by finite element method. J Biomech. 2006;39:21-32.
17. Wu W, Qi M, Liu XP, et al. Delivery and release of nitinol stent in carotid artery and their interactions: a finite element analysis. J Biomech. 2007; 40:3034-3040. (Pubitemid 47385815)
18. Theriault P, Terriault P, Brailovski V, et al. Finite element modeling of a progressively expanding shape memory stent. J Biomech. 2006;39: 2837-2844. (Pubitemid 44633039)
19. Early M, Lally C, Prendergast PJ, et al. Stresses in peripheral arteries following stent placement: a finite element analysis. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2009;12:25-33.
20. Early M, Kelly DJ. The role of vessel geometry and material properties on the mechanics of stenting in the coronary and peripheral arteries. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2010;224: 465-476.
21. Tonuk E, Silver-Thorn MB. Nonlinear elastic material property estimation of lower extremity residual limb tissues. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2003;11:43-53. (Pubitemid 36613251)
22. Zheng Y, Mak A, Leung A. State-of-the-art methods for geometric and biomechanical assessments of residual limbs: a review. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2001;38:487-504. (Pubitemid 34118827)
23. Steege J, Schnur D, Childress D, eds. Prediction of pressure at the below-knee socket interface by finite element analysis Symposium on the Biomechanics of Normal and Pathological Gait; 1987; Boston, MA, USA.
24. Krouskop TA, Muilenberg AL, Doughtery DR, et al. Computer-aided design of a prosthetic socket for an above-knee amputee. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1987;24:31-38. (Pubitemid 17117863)
25. Malinauskas M, Krouskop TA, Barry PA. Noninvasive measurement of the stiffness of tissue in the above-knee amputation limb. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1989;26:45-52. (Pubitemid 19189050)
26. Mak AF, Liu GH, Lee SY. Biomechanical assessment of below-knee residual limb tissue. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1994;31:188-198. (Pubitemid 24275718)
27. Zheng Y, Mak AF. Effective elastic properties for lower limb soft tissues from manual indentation experiment. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng. 1999;7:257-267. (Pubitemid 29444307)
28. Zheng Y, Mak AF, Lue B. Objective assessment of limb tissue elasticity: development of a manual indentation procedure. J Rehabil Res Dev. 1999;36:71-85. (Pubitemid 30022446)
29. Zarins CK, Taylor CA. Endovascular device design in the future: transformation from trial and error to computational design. J Endovasc Ther. 2009;16 Suppl 1:I12-21.
30. Smouse B, Nikanorov V, LaFlash D. Biomechanical forces in the femoropopliteal arterial segment. Endovascular Today. 2005;June: 60-66.
31. Lally C, Dolan F, Prendergast PJ. Cardiovascular stent design and vessel stresses: a finite element analysis. J Biomech. 2005;38:1574-1581. (Pubitemid 40813479)
32. Savage P, O'Donnell BP, McHugh PE, et al. Coronary stent strut size dependent stressstrain response investigated using micromechanical finite element models. Ann Biomed Eng. 2004;32:202-211.
33. Liang DK, Yang DZ, Qi M, et al. Finite element analysis of the implantation of a balloon-expandable stent in a stenosed artery. Int J Cardiol. 2005;104:314-318. (Pubitemid 41375592)
34. Early M, Kelly DJ. The role of vessel geometry and material properties on the mechanics of stenting in the coronary and peripheral arteries. Proc Inst Mech Eng H. 2010;224:465-476.