Advertisement

Mechanical stresses associated with flattening of human femoropopliteal artery specimens during planar biaxial testing and their effects on the calculated physiologic stress–stretch state

  • Majid Jadidi
  • Anastasia Desyatova
  • Jason MacTaggart
  • Alexey KamenskiyEmail author
Original Paper
  • 57 Downloads

Abstract

Planar biaxial testing is commonly used to characterize the mechanical properties of arteries, but stresses associated with specimen flattening during this test are unknown. We quantified flattening effects in human femoropopliteal arteries (FPAs) of different ages and determined how they affect the calculated arterial physiologic stress–stretch state. Human FPAs from 472 tissue donors (age 12–82 years, mean 53 ± 16 years) were tested using planar biaxial extension, and morphometric and mechanical characteristics were used to assess the flattening effects. Constitutive parameters for the invariant-based model were adjusted to account for specimen flattening and used to calculate the physiologic stresses, stretches, axial force, circumferential stiffness, and stored energy for the FPAs in seven age groups. Flattened specimens were overall 12 ± 4% stiffer longitudinally and 19 ± 11% stiffer circumferentially when biaxially tested. Differences between the stress–stretch curves adjusted and non-adjusted for the effects of flattening were relatively constant across all age groups longitudinally, but increased with age circumferentially. In all age groups, these differences were smaller than the intersubject variability. Physiologic stresses, stretches, axial force, circumferential stiffness, and stored energy were all qualitatively and quantitatively similar when calculated with and without the flattening effects. Stresses, stretches, axial force, and stored energy reduced with age, but circumferential stiffness remained relatively constant between 25 and 65 years of age suggesting a homeostatic target of 0.75 ± 0.02 MPa. Flattening effects associated with planar biaxial testing are smaller than the intersubject variability and have little influence on the calculated physiologic stress–stretch state of human FPAs.

Keywords

Planar biaxial test Femoropopliteal artery Constitutive modeling Physiologic state Aging 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge Live On Nebraska for their help and support and thank tissue donors and their families for making this study possible.

Funding

Research reported in this publication was supported in part by the National Heart, Lung, And Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number R01 HL125736.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest in relation to this submission.

References

  1. Adam DJ, Beard JD, Cleveland T et al (2005) Bypass versus angioplasty in severe ischaemia of the leg (BASIL): multicentre, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 366:1925–1934.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67704-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alford PW, Humphrey JD, Taber LA (2008) Growth and remodeling in a thick-walled artery model: effects of spatial variations in wall constituents. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 7:245–262.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-007-0101-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brossollet LJ, Vito RP (1995) An alternate formulation of blood vessel mechanics and the meaning of the in vivo property. J Biomech 28:679–687.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0021-9290(94)00119-O CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bustamante R, Holzapfel GA (2010) Methods to compute 3D residual stress distributions in hyperelastic tubes with application to arterial walls. Int J Eng Sci 48:1066–1082.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijengsci.2010.06.005 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Cardamone L, Valentín A, Eberth JF, Humphrey JD (2009) Origin of axial prestretch and residual stress in arteries. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 8(6):431–446CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Conte MS, Bandyk DF, Clowes AW et al (2006) Results of PREVENT III: a multicenter, randomized trial of edifoligide for the prevention of vein graft failure in lower extremity bypass surgery. J Vasc Surg 43:742–751.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2005.12.058 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Desyatova A, MacTaggart J, Kamenskiy A (2017a) Constitutive modeling of human femoropopliteal artery biaxial stiffening due to aging and diabetes. Acta Biomater 64:50–58.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2017.09.042 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Desyatova A, Poulson W, Deegan P et al (2017b) Limb flexion-induced twist and associated intramural stresses In the human femoropopliteal artery. J R Soc Interface.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2017.0025 Google Scholar
  9. Desyatova A, Poulson W, MacTaggart J et al (2018) Cross-sectional pinching in human femoropopliteal arteries due to limb flexion, and stent design optimization for maximum cross-sectional opening and minimum intramural stresses. J R Soc Interface 15:10–14.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0475 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feldman SA, Glagov S (1971) Transmedial collagen and elastin gradients in human aortas: reversal with age. Atherosclerosis 13:385–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ferruzzi J, Vorp DA, Humphrey JD (2011) On constitutive descriptors of the biaxial mechanical behaviour of human abdominal aorta and aneurysms. J R Soc Interface 8:435–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ferruzzi J, Di Achille P, Tellides G, Humphrey JD (2018) Combining in vivo and in vitro biomechanical data reveals key roles of perivascular tethering in central artery function. PLoS ONE 13:1–21.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201379 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Holzapfel GA, Ogden RW (2009) On planar biaxial tests for anisotropic nonlinearly elastic solids. A continuum mechanical framework. Math Mech Solids 14:474–489.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1081286507084411 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Holzapfel GA, Ogden RW (2010a) Constitutive modelling of arteries. Proc R Soc A Math Phys Eng Sci 466:1551–1597.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2010.0058 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Holzapfel GA, Ogden RW (2010b) Modelling the layer-specific three-dimensional residual stresses in arteries, with an application to the human aorta. J R Soc Interface 7:787–799CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Holzapfel GA, Gasser TC, Ogden RW (2000) A new constitutive framework for arterial wall mechanics and a comparative study of material models. J Elast 61:1–48MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Holzapfel GA, Sommer G, Auer M et al (2007) Layer-specific 3D residual deformations of human aortas with non-atherosclerotic intimal thickening. Ann Biomed Eng 35:530–545CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Humphrey JD (2002) Cardiovascular solid mechanics. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Humphrey JD (2008) Vascular adaptation and mechanical homeostasis at tissue, cellular, and sub-cellular levels. Cell Biochem Biophys 50:53–78.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12013-007-9002-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Humphrey JD, Dufresne ER, Schwartz MA (2014) Mechanotransduction and extracellular matrix homeostasis. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 15:802–812.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm3896 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kamenskiy A, Pipinos I, Dzenis Y et al (2014) Passive biaxial mechanical properties and in vivo axial pre-stretch of the diseased human femoropopliteal and tibial arteries. Acta Biomater 10:1301–1313.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2013.12.027 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kamenskiy AV, Pipinos II, Dzenis YA et al (2015) Effects of age on the physiological and mechanical characteristics of human femoropopliteal arteries. Acta Biomater 11:304–313.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2014.09.050 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kamenskiy A, Seas A, Bowen G et al (2016) In situ longitudinal pre-stretch in the human femoropopliteal artery. Acta Biomater 32:231–237.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2016.01.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kamenskiy A, Seas A, Deegan P et al (2017) Constitutive description of human femoropopliteal artery aging. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 16:681–692.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-016-0845-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Keyes JT, Lockwood DR, Utzinger U et al (2013) Comparisons of planar and tubular biaxial tensile testing protocols of the same porcine coronary arteries. Ann Biomed Eng 41:1579–1591.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-012-0679-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. MacTaggart JN, Phillips NY, Lomneth CS et al (2014) Three-dimensional bending, torsion and axial compression of the femoropopliteal artery during limb flexion. J Biomech 47:2249–2256.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.04.053 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mahoney EM, Wang K, Cohen DJ et al (2008) One-year costs in patients with a history of or at risk for atherothrombosis in the United States. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes 1:38–45.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.108.775247 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Maleckis K, Anttila E, Aylward P et al (2018) Nitinol stents in the femoropopliteal artery: a mechanical perspective on material, design, and performance. Ann Biomed Eng.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-018-1990-1 Google Scholar
  29. Ogden RW (1997) Non-linear elastic deformations. Dover Publications, MineolaGoogle Scholar
  30. Poulson W, Kamenskiy A, Seas A et al (2018) Limb flexion-induced axial compression and bending in human femoropopliteal artery segments. J Vasc Surg 67:607–613.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvs.2017.01.071 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Saini A, Berry C, Greenwald S (1995) Effect of age and sex on residual stress in the aorta. J Vasc Res 32:398–405.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000159115 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Schillinger M, Sabeti S, Loewe C (2006) Balloon angioplasty versus implantation of nitinol stents in the superficial femoral artery. N Engl J Med 354:1879–1888CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schillinger M, Sabeti S, Dick P et al (2007) Sustained benefit at 2 years of primary femoropopliteal stenting compared with balloon angioplasty with optional stenting. Circulation 115:2745–2749.  https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.107.688341 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schulze-Bauer CAJ, Morth C, Holzapfel GA (2003) Passive biaxial mechanical response of aged human iliac arteries. J Biomech Eng 125:395.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.1574331 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sommer G, Holzapfel GA (2012) 3D constitutive modeling of the biaxial mechanical response of intact and layer-dissected human carotid arteries. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 5:116–128.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2011.08.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sommer G, Regitnig P, Koltringer L, Holzapfel GA (2010) Biaxial mechanical properties of intact and layer-dissected human carotid arteries at physiological and supra-physiological loadings. Am J Physiol Hear Circ Physiol 298:H898–H912CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sommer G, Benedikt C, Niestrawska JA et al (2017) Mechanical response of human subclavian and iliac arteries to extension, inflation and torsion. Acta Biomater 5:1.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actbio.2018.05.043 Google Scholar
  38. Stålhand J, Klarbring A (2005) Aorta in vivo parameter identification using an axial force constraint. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 3:191–199.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-004-0057-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Vaishnav RN, Vossoughi J (1983) Estimation of residual strains in aortic segments. In: Biomedical engineering II. Elsevier, pp 330–333Google Scholar
  40. Valentín A, Humphrey JD, Holzapfel GA (2011) A multi-layered computational model of coupled elastin degradation, vasoactive dysfunction, and collagenous stiffening in aortic aging. Ann Biomed Eng 39:2027–2045.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-011-0287-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Van Loon P, Klip W, Bradley E (1977) Length-force and volume-pressure relationships of arteries. Biorheology 14:181–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Weizsacker H, Lambert H, Pascale K (1983) Analysis of the passive mechanical properties of rat carotid arteries. J Biomech 16(9):703–715CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Materials EngineeringUniversity of Nebraska-LincolnLincolnUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgery987690 Nebraska Medical Center, University of Nebraska Medical CenterOmahaUSA

Personalised recommendations