MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2966732735 · doi:10.1111/aor.13552

Comparison of tensile properties of xenopericardium from three animal species and finite element analysis for bioprosthetic heart valve tissue

2019· article· en· W2966732735 on OpenAlexaff
Aisa Rassoli, Nasser Fatouraee, Robert Guidoin, Ze Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueArtificial Organs · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsCentre hospitalier de l'Université Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPericardiumMaterials scienceCalcificationBiomedical engineeringUltimate tensile strengthFinite element methodAnatomyStress (linguistics)AnisotropyComposite materialStructural engineeringPathologyMedicineCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bioprosthetic heart valves still have poor long-term durability due to calcification and mechanical failure. The function and performance of bioprostheses is known to depend on the collagen architecture and mechanical behavior of the target tissue. So it is necessary to select an appropriate tissue for such prostheses. In this study, porcine, equine, and bovine pericardia were compared histologically and mechanically. The specimens were analyzed under light microscopy. The planar biaxial tests were performed on the tissue samples by applying synchronic loads along the axial (fiber direction) and perpendicular directions. The measured biaxial data were then fitted into both the modified Mooney-Rivlin model and the anisotropic four parameter Fung-type model. The modified Mooney-Rivlin model was applied to the modeling of the bovine, equine, and porcine pericardia using finite element analysis. The equine pericardium illustrated a wavy collagen bundle architecture similar to bovine pericardium, whereas the collagen bundles in the porcine pericardium were thinner and structured. Wavy pericardia may be preferable candidates for transcutaneous aortic valves because they are less likely to be delaminated during crimping. Based on the biaxial tensile test, the specimens indicated some degree of anisotropy; the anisotropy rates of the equine specimens were almost identical, and higher than the other two specimens. In general, porcine pericardium appeared stiffer, based on the greater strain energy magnitude and the average slope of the stress-stretch curves. Moreover, it was less distensible (due to lower areal strain) than the other two pericardial tissues. Furthermore, the porcine model induced localized high stress regions during the systolic and diastolic phases of the cardiac cycle. However, increased mechanical stress on the bioprosthetic leaflets may cause tissue degeneration and reduce the long-term durability of the valve. Based on our observations, the pericardial specimens behaved as anisotropic and nonlinear tissues-well-characterized by both the modified Mooney-Rivlin and the Fung-type models. The results indicate that, compared to bovine pericardium, equine tissue is mechanically and histologically more appropriate for manufacturing heart valve prostheses. The results of this study can be used in the design and manufacture of bioprosthetic heart valves.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations27
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArtificial OrgansSame topicCardiac Valve Diseases and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207