Cardiovascular Engineering and Technology

, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 254–269 | Cite as

An Experimental and Computational Study on the Effect of Caval Valved Stent Oversizing

  • Munirah Ismail
  • Gideon Praveen Kumar
  • Foad Kabinejadian
  • Yen Ngoc Nguyen
  • Fangsen Cui
  • Edgar Lik Wui Tay
  • Hwa Liang Leo
Article

Abstract

Heterotopic implantation of transcatheter tricuspid valve is a new treatment option for tricuspid regurgitation. Transcatheter tricuspid valves are implanted onto the cavoatrial junction in order to avoid the challenging task of anchoring the valve onto the complex tricuspid valve annulus. However, little is known about optimum extent of oversizing of the valved stent in a vena cava. In this study, we implanted valves of the same diameter onto the larger sized inferior vena cava (IVC) and a smaller sized superior vena cava (SVC). The valve in the IVC was oversized by 10.7% while the valve in the SVC was oversized by 21.6%. Finite element analysis was performed (i) to assess the strain on the nitinol stent during manufacturing and deployment; (ii) the stents were deployed in a patient-specific vena cava model and the intramural stress of the vena cava was calculated computationally. These valves were fabricated and placed in a silicone model of a patient-specific right atrium which was part of a mock circulatory system that emulated the patho-physiological flow rate and pressure of a patient with tricuspid regurgitation. Flow measurements were conducted by particle image velocimetry (PIV). It was found that the maximum crimping strain on the nitinol stent was 6.85% which was lower than the critical threshold of 10%. The maximum stress on the vena cava was located at the spot where the hooks met the wall. The maximum stress on the IVC was 0.5098 MPa while the maximum stress on the SVC was 0.7 MPa. The maximum Reynolds shear stress (mRSS) in the vena cava was found to be higher in the IVC than SVC with the highest mRSS being 1741 dynes/cm2 found in the region of high flow during the peak flow phase. The overtly oversized valve in the SVC did not cause flow disturbances and exhibited mostly laminar flows. The mRSS at the downstream of the vena cava valve and the middle of the atrium remained at low magnitudes. However, velocity fluctuations were high in the IVC in all the time points measured. In conclusion, oversizing the valve may assist anchorage; yet, careful consideration should be taken in choosing the extent of oversizing as it may lead to adverse effects.

Keywords

Transcatheter tricuspid valve Caval valves Hemodynamics Stent oversizing Finite element analysis Particle image velocimetry 

References

  1. 1.
    Auricchio, F., et al. Carotid artery stenting simulation: from patient-specific images to finite element analysis. Med. Eng. Phys. 33(3):281–289, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aycock, K. I., et al. A computational method for predicting inferior vena cava filter performance on a patient-specific basis. J. Biomech. Eng. 136(8):1–10, 2014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Black, J., and G. Hastings. Handbook of Biomaterial Properties. New York: Springer, p. 590, 1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Blanke, P., et al. Oversizing in transcatheter aortic valve replacement, a commonly used term but a poorly understood one: Dependency on definition and geometrical measurements. J. Cardiovasc. Comput. Tomogr. 8(1):67–76, 2014.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chen, H. Y., et al. Effects of stent sizing on endothelial and vessel wall stress: potential mechanisms for in-stent restenosis. J. Appl. Physiol. (1985) 106(5):1686–1691, 2009.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Debusschere, N., et al. A finite element strategy to investigate the free expansion behaviour of a biodegradable polymeric stent (1873-2380 (Electronic)).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Duerig, T., D. Tolomeo, and M. Wholey. An overview of superelastic stent design. Minim. Invasive Ther. Allied Technol. 9(3–4):235–246, 2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ellis, J. T., B. R. Travis, and A. P. Yoganathan. An in vitro study of the hinge and near-field forward flow dynamics of the St. Jude Medical Regent bileaflet mechanical heart valve. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2000(0090-6964 (Print)).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Famaey, N., et al. Arterial clamping: finite element simulation and in vivo validation (1878-0180 (Electronic)).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garcia, A., E. Pena, and M. A. Martinez. Influence of geometrical parameters on radial force during self-expanding stent deployment. Application for a variable radial stiffness stent. J. Mech. Behav. Biomed. Mater. 10:166–175, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hansen, D. C. Metal corrosion in the human body: the ultimate bio-corrosion scenario. Electrochem. Soc. Interface 17:31, 2008.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Higdon, A. Mechanics of materials (4th ed.). New York: Wiley, 1985; (xvii, 744 p.).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Holzapfel, G. A., T. C. Gasser, and R. W. Ogden. A new constitutive framework for arterial wall mechanics and a comparative study of material models. J. Elast. Phys. Sci. Solids 61(1–3):1–48, 2000.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hsiao, H. ., et al. Effects of through-hole drug reservoirs on key clinical attributes for drug-eluting depot stent (1873-4030 (Electronic)).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ismail, M., et al. In vitro investigation of the hemodynamics of transcatheter heterotopic valves implantation in the cavo-atrial junction. doi:10.1111/aor.12457 (1525-1594 (Electronic)).
  16. 16.
    Kaminsky, R., et al. Flow visualization through two types of aortic prosthetic heart valves using stereoscopic high-speed particle image velocimetry. Artif. Organs 31(12):869–879, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kleinstreuer, C., et al. Computational mechanics of nitinol stent grafts. J. Biomech. 41(11):2370–2378, 2008.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kumar, G. P., et al. Design and finite element-based fatigue prediction of a new self-expandable percutaneous mitral valve stent. Comput. Aided Des. 45(10):1153–1158, 2013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leo, H. L., et al. Fluid dynamic assessment of three polymeric heart valves using particle image velocimetry. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 34(6):936–952, 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mestres, G., et al. The best conditions for parallel stenting during EVAR: an in vitro study. Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg. 44(5):468–473, 2012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mortier, P., et al. Finite element analysis of side branch access during bifurcation stenting (1873-4030 (Electronic)).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ragkousis, G. E., N. Curzen, and N. W. Bressloff. Simulation of longitudinal stent deformation in a patient-specific coronary artery (1873-4030 (Electronic)).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Redwood, S., N. Curzen, and M. Thomas. Oxford Textbook of Interventional Cardiology. USA: Oxford University Press, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schiavone, A., L. G. Zhao, and A. A. Abdel-Wahab. Effects of material, coating, design and plaque composition on stent deployment inside a stenotic artery—finite element simulation (1873-0191 (Electronic)).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shobayashi, Y., et al. Mechanical design of an intracranial stent for treating cerebral aneurysms. Med. Eng. Phys. 32(9):1015–1024, 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sobin, P. B. Mechanical Properties of Human Vein. New York: Springer, 1977.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Systèmes, D. Best practices for stent analysis with ABAQUS, 2015. Available from: www.3ds.com.
  28. 28.
    Vulev, I., et al. Endovascular treatment of internal carotid and vertebral artery aneurysms using a novel pericardium covered stent. Interv. Neuroradiol. 18(2):164–171, 2012.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wieneke, B. Stereo-PIV using self-calibration on particle images. Exp. Fluids 39(2):267–280, 2005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Biomedical Engineering Society 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Munirah Ismail
    • 1
  • Gideon Praveen Kumar
    • 2
  • Foad Kabinejadian
    • 3
  • Yen Ngoc Nguyen
    • 1
  • Fangsen Cui
    • 2
  • Edgar Lik Wui Tay
    • 4
  • Hwa Liang Leo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biomedical EngineeringNational University of SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Institute of High Performance ComputingA*STARSingaporeSingapore
  3. 3.Department of Biomedical EngineeringUniversity of MichiganAnn ArborUSA
  4. 4.Department of CardiologyNational University Heart CentreSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations