Advertisement

Numerical Simulation of the Deployment Process of a New Stent Produced by Ultrasonic-Microcasting: The Role of the Balloon’s Constitutive Modeling

  • I. V. GomesEmail author
  • H. Puga
  • J. L. Alves
Chapter
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computational Vision and Biomechanics book series (LNCVB, volume 999)

Abstract

The application of the Finite Element Method (FEM) allows to predict the behavior of a stent during the deployment process and when in service, being a powerful tool to use in its design and development. As the promoter of the stent expansion, the balloon plays a very important role, offering a strong influence on its performance, mainly during the deployment process. This element is usually built in a rubber-like material such as polyurethane, being modeled as linear elastic or hyperelastic with a Mooney–Rivlin description. This work aims, through FEM analysis, the study of the influence of both adopted material formulation—linear elastic or hyperelastic—as well as the respective material constants and properties for the balloon modeling on the performance of a biocompatible magnesium stent regarding a set of metrics. Furthermore, a comparison is established between those results and the obtained ones in the scenario of application of pressure directly in the inner surface of the stent, neglecting the balloon. The obtained results suggest that material formulation has a direct influence on the stent deployment process. Concerning to hyperelastic models, two different combinations of parameter values were tested, showing a similar behavior regarding the considered metrics, while the linear elastic model presents comparable values for the expansion pressure and recoil, but different in terms of dogboning and foreshortening. The scenario of neglecting the balloon suggests providing the highest values of dogboning, foreshortening, and recoil, with an expansion pressure inferior to that of hyperelastic models.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by FEDER funds through the COMPETE program with the reference project PTDC/SEM-TEC/3827/2014 and PTDC/EMS-TEC/0702/2014. Additionally, this work was supported by FCT with the reference project UID/EEA/04436/2013 and by FEDER funds through the COMPETE 2020 with the reference project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006941.

References

  1. 1.
    Roy T, Chanda A (2014) Computational modeling and analysis of latest commercially available coronary stents during deployment. Procedia Mater Sci 5:2310–2319CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li N, Gu Y (2005) Parametric design analysis and shape optimization of coronary arteries stent structure. In: Proceeding 6th World Congress of Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, vol 30Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Azaouzi M, Makradi A, Belouettar S (2013) Numerical investigations of the structural behavior of a balloon expandable stent design using finite element method. Comput Mater Sci 72:54–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Imani M, Goudarzi AM, Ganji DD, Aghili AL (2013) The comprehensive finite element model for stenting: the influence of stent design on the outcome after coronary stent placement. J Theor Appl Mech 51(3):639–648Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Schiavone A, Zhao LG (2015) A study of balloon type, system constraint and artery constitutive model used in finite element simulation of stent deployment. Mech Adv Mater Mod Process 1(1)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    De Beule M, Mortier P, Carlier SG, Verhegghe B, Van Impe R, Verdonck P (2008) Realistic finite element-based stent design: The impact of balloon folding. J Biomech 41(2):383–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eshghi N, Hojjati MH, Imani M, Goudarzi AM (2011) Finite element analysis of mechanical behaviors of coronary stent. Procedia Eng 10:3056–3061CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gay M, Zhang L, Liu WK (2006) Stent modeling using immersed finite element method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 195(33–36):4358–4370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang W-Q, Liang D-K, Yang D-Z, Qi M (2006) Analysis of the transient expansion behavior and design optimization of coronary stents by finite element method. J Biomech 39(1):21–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gervaso F, Capelli C, Petrini L, Lattanzio S, Di Virgilio L, Migliavacca F (2008) On the effects of different strategies in modeling balloon-expandable stenting by means of finite element method. J Biomech 41(6):1206–1212CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pant S, Bressloff NW, Limbert G (2012) Geometry parameterization and multidisciplinary constrained optimization of coronary stents. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 11(1–2):61–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Schiavone A, Zhao LG (2016) A computational study of stent performance by considering vessel anisotropy and residual stresses. Mater Sci Eng C 62:307–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schiavone A, Abunassar C, Hossainy S, Zhao LG (2016) Computational analysis of mechanical stress–strain interaction of a bioresorbable scaffold with blood vessel. J Biomech 49(13):2677–2683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Guo Z, Sluys LJ (2008) Constitutive modeling of hyperelastic rubber-like materials. HERON 53:3Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chua SND, Mac Donald BJ, Hashmi MSJ (2003) Finite element simulation of stent and balloon interaction. J Mater Process Technol 143–144:591–597Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beigzadeh B, Mirmohammadi SA, Ayatollahi MR (2017) A numerical study on the effect of geometrical parameters and loading profile on the expansion of stent. Biomed Mater Eng 28(5):463–476PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gomes IV, Puga H, Alves JL (2017) Shape and functional optimization of biodegradable magnesium stents for manufacturing by ultrasonic-microcasting technique. Int J Interact Des Manuf IJIDeMGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Li H et al (2017) Design optimization of stent and its dilatation balloon using kriging surrogate model. Biomed. Eng OnLine 16(1)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zahedmanesh H, John Kelly D, Lally C (2010) Simulation of a balloon expandable stent in a realistic coronary artery—Determination of the optimum modeling strategy. J Biomech 43(11):2126–2132CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CMEMS – Center for Microelectromechanical SystemsGuimarãesPortugal
  2. 2.MIT-Portugal Program, Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of MinhoGuimarãesPortugal

Personalised recommendations