{"database":"biostudies-literature","file_versions":[],"scores":null,"additional":{"submitter":["Gomez A"],"funding":["American Heart Association","NHLBI NIH HHS","National Institutes of Health"],"pagination":["1365-1375"],"full_dataset_link":["https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC8716675"],"repository":["biostudies-literature"],"omics_type":["Unknown"],"volume":["164(5)"],"pubmed_abstract":["<h4>Objective</h4>Ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms carry a risk of acute type A dissection. Elective repair guidelines are designed around size thresholds, but the 1-dimensional parameter of maximum diameter cannot predict acute events in small aneurysms. Biomechanically, dissection can occur when wall stress exceeds strength. Patient-specific ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm wall stresses may be a better predictor of dissection. Our aim was to compare wall stresses in tricuspid aortic valve-associated ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms based on diameter.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with tricuspid aortic valve-associated ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm and diameter 4.0 cm or greater (n = 221) were divided into groups by 0.5-cm diameter increments. Three-dimensional geometries were reconstructed from computed tomography images, and finite element models were developed taking into account prestress geometries. A fiber-embedded hyperelastic material model was applied to obtain longitudinal and circumferential wall stress distributions under systolic pressure. Median stresses with interquartile ranges were determined. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for comparisons between size groups.<h4>Results</h4>Peak longitudinal wall stresses for tricuspid aortic valve-associated ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm were 290 (265-323) kPa for size 4.0 to 4.4 cm versus 330 (296-359) kPa for 4.5 to 4.9 cm versus 339 (320-373) kPa for 5.0 to 5.4 cm versus 318 (293-351) kPa for 5.5 to 5.9 cm versus 373 (363-449) kPa for 6.0 cm or greater (P = 8.7e-8). Peak circumferential wall stresses were 460 (421-543) kPa for size 4.0 to 4.4 cm versus 503 (453-569) kPa for 4.5 to 4.9 cm versus 549 (430-588) kPa for 5.0 to 5.4 cm versus 540 (471-608) kPa for 5.5 to 5.9 cm versus 596 (506-649) kPa for 6.0 cm or greater (P = .0007).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Circumferential and longitudinal wall stresses are higher as diameter increases, but size groups had large overlap of stress ranges. Wall stress thresholds based on aneurysm wall strength may be a better predictor of patient-specific risk of dissection than diameter in small ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms."],"journal":["The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery"],"pubmed_title":["Association of diameter and wall stresses of tricuspid aortic valve ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms."],"pmcid":["PMC8716675"],"funding_grant_id":["K25HL150408","K25 HL150408","10-03594","13-10932","R01HL119857-01A1","20POST35211107","R01 HL119857"],"pubmed_authors":["Guccione JM","Tseng EE","Hope MD","Saloner DA","Xuan Y","Ge L","Wang Z","Gomez A"],"additional_accession":[]},"is_claimable":false,"name":"Association of diameter and wall stresses of tricuspid aortic valve ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms.","description":"<h4>Objective</h4>Ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms carry a risk of acute type A dissection. Elective repair guidelines are designed around size thresholds, but the 1-dimensional parameter of maximum diameter cannot predict acute events in small aneurysms. Biomechanically, dissection can occur when wall stress exceeds strength. Patient-specific ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm wall stresses may be a better predictor of dissection. Our aim was to compare wall stresses in tricuspid aortic valve-associated ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms based on diameter.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients with tricuspid aortic valve-associated ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm and diameter 4.0 cm or greater (n = 221) were divided into groups by 0.5-cm diameter increments. Three-dimensional geometries were reconstructed from computed tomography images, and finite element models were developed taking into account prestress geometries. A fiber-embedded hyperelastic material model was applied to obtain longitudinal and circumferential wall stress distributions under systolic pressure. Median stresses with interquartile ranges were determined. The Kruskal-Wallis test was used for comparisons between size groups.<h4>Results</h4>Peak longitudinal wall stresses for tricuspid aortic valve-associated ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm were 290 (265-323) kPa for size 4.0 to 4.4 cm versus 330 (296-359) kPa for 4.5 to 4.9 cm versus 339 (320-373) kPa for 5.0 to 5.4 cm versus 318 (293-351) kPa for 5.5 to 5.9 cm versus 373 (363-449) kPa for 6.0 cm or greater (P = 8.7e-8). Peak circumferential wall stresses were 460 (421-543) kPa for size 4.0 to 4.4 cm versus 503 (453-569) kPa for 4.5 to 4.9 cm versus 549 (430-588) kPa for 5.0 to 5.4 cm versus 540 (471-608) kPa for 5.5 to 5.9 cm versus 596 (506-649) kPa for 6.0 cm or greater (P = .0007).<h4>Conclusions</h4>Circumferential and longitudinal wall stresses are higher as diameter increases, but size groups had large overlap of stress ranges. Wall stress thresholds based on aneurysm wall strength may be a better predictor of patient-specific risk of dissection than diameter in small ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms.","dates":{"release":"2022-01-01T00:00:00Z","publication":"2022 Nov","modification":"2025-04-04T13:41:04.728Z","creation":"2025-04-04T13:41:04.728Z"},"accession":"S-EPMC8716675","cross_references":{"pubmed":["34275618"],"doi":["10.1016/j.jtcvs.2021.05.049"]}}