Endre søk
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Biomechanical Rupture Risk Assessment
KTH, Skolan för teknikvetenskap (SCI), Teknisk mekanik, Farkostteknik och Solidmekanik, Hållfasthetslära.ORCID-id: 0000-0003-1089-4215
2016 (engelsk)Inngår i: AORTA, ISSN 2325-4637, Vol. 4, nr 2, s. 42-60Artikkel i tidsskrift (Fagfellevurdert) Published
Abstract [en]

Abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture is a local event in the aneurysm wall that naturally demands tools to assess the risk for local wall rupture. Consequently, global parameters like the maximum diameter and its expansion over time can only give very rough risk indications; therefore, they frequently fail to predict individual risk for AAA rupture. In contrast, the Biomechanical Rupture Risk Assessment (BRRA) method investigates the wall's risk for local rupture by quantitatively integrating many known AAA rupture risk factors like female sex, large relative expansion, intraluminal thrombus-related wall weakening, and high blood pressure. The BRRA method is almost 20 years old and has progressed considerably in recent years, it can now potentially enrich the diameter indication for AAA repair. The present paper reviews the current state of the BRRA method by summarizing its key underlying concepts (i.e., geometry modeling, biomechanical simulation, and result interpretation). Specifically, the validity of the underlying model assumptions is critically disused in relation to the intended simulation objective (i.e., a clinical AAA rupture risk assessment). Next, reported clinical BRRA validation studies are summarized, and their clinical relevance is reviewed. The BRRA method is a generic, biomechanics-based approach that provides several interfaces to incorporate information from different research disciplines. As an example, the final section of this review suggests integrating growth aspects to (potentially) further improve BRRA sensitivity and specificity. Despite the fact that no prospective validation studies are reported, a significant and still growing body of validation evidence suggests integrating the BRRA method into the clinical decision-making process (i.e., enriching diameter-based decision-making in AAA patient treatment). 

sted, utgiver, år, opplag, sider
Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc. , 2016. Vol. 4, nr 2, s. 42-60
Emneord [en]
Abdominal aortic aneurysm, Biomechanics, Peak wall stress, Rupture risk, Wall stress
HSV kategori
Identifikatorer
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-314002DOI: 10.12945/j.aorta.2015.15.030Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85127319413OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-314002DiVA, id: diva2:1669107
Merknad

QC 20220614

Tilgjengelig fra: 2022-06-14 Laget: 2022-06-14 Sist oppdatert: 2026-09-25bibliografisk kontrollert

Open Access i DiVA

Fulltekst mangler i DiVA

Andre lenker

Forlagets fulltekstScopus

Person

Gasser, T. Christian

Søk i DiVA

Av forfatter/redaktør
Gasser, T. Christian
Av organisasjonen

Søk utenfor DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric

doi
urn-nbn
Totalt: 72 treff
RefereraExporteraLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Referera
Referensformat
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Annet format
Fler format
Språk
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Annet språk
Fler språk
Utmatningsformat
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf