Annals of Biomedical Engineering

, Volume 45, Issue 9, pp 2244–2252 | Cite as

Numerical Simulation of Stent Angioplasty with Predilation: An Investigation into Lesion Constitutive Representation and Calcification Influence

  • C. ConwayEmail author
  • J. P. McGarry
  • E. R. Edelman
  • P. E. McHugh


It is acceptable clinical practice to predilate a severely occluded vessel to allow better positioning of endovascular stents, and while the impact of this intervention has been examined for aggregate response in animals there has been no means to examine whether there are specific vessels that might benefit. Finite element methods offer the singular ability to explore the mechanical response of arteries with specific pathologic alterations in mechanics to stenting and predilation. We examined varying representations of atherosclerotic tissue including homogeneous and heterogeneous dispersion of calcified particles, and elastic, pseudo-elastic, and elastic–plastic constitutive representations of bulk atherosclerotic tissue. The constitutive representations of the bulk atherosclerotic tissue were derived from experimental test data and highlight the importance of accounting for testing mode of loading. The impact of arterial predilation is presented and, in particular, its effect on intimal predicted damage, atherosclerotic tissue von Mises and maximum principal stresses, and luminal deformation was dependent on the type of constitutive representation of diseased tissue, particularly in the presence of calcifications.


Stent Atherosclerosis Predilation angioplasty Finite element analysis Pseudo-elasticity Calcification 



The authors would like to acknowledge funding from the Irish Research Council/Irish Research Council for Science, Engineering and Technology (CC), the support of the Research Participation Program at US FDA administered by Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (CC), the US National Institutes of Health R01 GM 49039 (ERE), the SFI/HEA Irish Centre for High End Computing and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Engaging Centre for the provision of computational facilities and support.


  1. 1.
    Kay P., M. Sabate, and M. A. Costa (eds): Cardiac Catheterization and Percutaneous Interventions. ed 1 Informa Healthcare, 2004.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rogers, C., and E. R. Edelman. Endovascular stent design dictates experimental restenosis and thrombosis. Circulation 15(91):2995–3001, 1995.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Edelman, E. R., and C. Rogers. Pathobiologic responses to stenting. Am. J. Cardiol. 81:4E–6E, 1998.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Conway, C., F. Sharif, J. McGarry, and P. McHugh. A computational test-bed to assess coronary stent implantation mechanics using a population-specific approach. Cardiovasc. Eng. Technol. 3:1–14, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Conway, C., J. P. McGarry, and P. E. McHugh. Modelling of atherosclerotic plaque for use in a computational test-bed for stent angioplasty. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 11(42):2425–2439, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mortier, P., G. A. Holzapfel, M. De Beule, D. Van Loo, Y. Taeymans, P. Segers, et al. A novel simulation strategy for stent insertion and deployment in curved coronary bifurcations: comparison of three drug-eluting stents. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 38:88–99, 2010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zahedmanesh, H., D. John Kelly, and C. Lally. Simulation of a balloon expandable stent in a realistic coronary artery—determination of the optimum modelling strategy. J. Biomech. 43:2126–2132, 2010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gastaldi, D., S. Morlacchi, R. Nichetti, C. Capelli, G. Dubini, L. Petrini, et al. Modelling of the provisional side-branch stenting approach for the treatment of atherosclerotic coronary bifurcations: effects of stent positioning. Biomech. Model Mechanobiol. 9:551–561, 2010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gijsen, F., F. Migliavacca, S. Schievano, L. Socci, L. Petrini, A. Thury, et al. Simulation of stent deployment in a realistic human coronary artery. Biomed. Eng. Online 7:23, 2008. doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-7-23.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Morlacchi, S., and F. Migliavacca. Modeling stented coronary arteries: where we are, where to go. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 41:1428–1444, 2013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Martin, D., and F. J. Boyle. Computational structural modelling of coronary stnet deployment: a review. Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng. 14:331–348, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zahedmanesh, H., and C. Lally. Determination of the influence of stent strut thickness using the finite element method: implications for vascular injury and in-stent restenosis. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 47:385–393, 2009.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zahedmanesh, H., D. John Kelly, and C. Lally. Simulation of a balloon expandable stent in a realistic coronary artery—determination of the optimum modelling strategy. J Biomech 43:2126–2132, 2010.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Reilly, B. L., C. Conway, J. P. McGarry, and P. E. McHugh. Arterial and atherosclerotic plaque biomechanics with application to stent angioplasty modeling. In: Biomechanics: Trends in Modeling and Simulation, edited by G. A. Holzapfel, and R. W. Ogden. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2017, pp. 193–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ogden, R. W., and D. G. Roxburgh. A pseudo-elastic model for the Mullins effect in filled rubber. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 455:2861–2877, 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Miehe, C. Discontinuous and continuous damage evolution in Ogden type large stgrain elastic materials. Eur. J. Mech. A Solids 14:697–720, 1995.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Maher, E., A. Creane, S. Sultan, N. Hynes, C. Lally, and D. J. Kelly. Inelasticity of human carotid atherosclerotic plaque. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 39:2445–2455, 2011.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Peña, E., and M. Doblaré. An anisotropic pseudo-elastic approach for modelling Mullins effect in fibrous biological materials. Mech. Res. Commun. 36:784–790, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Balzani, D., J. Schröder, and D. Gross. Simulation of discontinuous damage incorporating residual stresses in circumferentially overstretched atherosclerotic arteries. Acta Biomater. 2:609–618, 2006.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Peña, E., J. A. Peña, and M. Doblaré. On the Mullins effect and hysteresis of fibered biological materials: a comparison between continuous and discontinuous damage models. Int. J. Solids Struct. 46:1727–1735, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Calvo, B., E. Peña, M. A. Martinez, and M. Doblaré. An uncoupled directional damage model for fibred biological soft tissues. Formulation and computational aspects. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 69:2036–2057, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Dassault Systemes: Abaqus 6.13 Documentation. 2013.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stary, H. Atlas of Atherosclerosis Progression and Regression. New York: Parthenon Publishing, 1999.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grogan, J. A., S. B. Leen, and P. E. McHugh. Comparing coronary stent material performance on a common geometric platform through simulated bench testing. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 12:129–138, 2012.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Loree, H. M., A. J. Grodzinsky, S. Y. Park, L. J. Gibson, and R. T. Lee. Static circumferential tangential modulus of human atherosclerotic tissue. J. Biomech. 27:195–204, 1994.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ebenstein, D. M., D. Coughlin, J. Chapman, C. Li, and L. A. Pruitt. Nanomechanical properties of calcification, fibrous tissue, and hematoma from atherosclerotic plaques. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. A 91A:1028–1037, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Holzapfel, G. A., G. Sommer, and P. Regitnig. Anisotropic mechanical properties of tissue components in human atherosclerotic plaques. J. Biomech. Eng. 126:657–665, 2004.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    FDA: Non-Clinical Engineering Tests and Recommended Labeling for Intravascular Stents and Associated Delivery Systems. Guid Ind FDA Staff 2010, pp. 1–51. Accessed 22 April 2014.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Biomedical Engineering Society 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biomechanics Research Centre (BMEC), Biomedical Engineering, College of Engineering and InformaticsNational University of Ireland GalwayGalwayIreland
  2. 2.Institute for Medical Engineering and Science (IMES)Massachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA
  3. 3.Cardiovascular DivisionHarvard Medical School, Brigham and Women’s HospitalBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations