Wall stresses of early remodeled pulmonary autografts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The Ross procedure is an excellent option for children or young adults who need aortic valve replacement because it can restore survival to that of the normal aged-matched population. However, autograft remodeling can lead to aneurysmal formation and reoperation, and the biomechanics of this process is unknown. This study investigated postoperative autograft remodeling after the Ross procedure by examining patient-specific autograft wall stresses. METHODS: Patients who have undergone the Ross procedure who had intraoperative pulmonary root and aortic specimens collected were recruited. Patient-specific models (n = 16) were developed using patient-specific material property and their corresponding geometry from cine magnetic resonance imaging at 1-year follow-up. Autograft ± Dacron for aneurysm repair and ascending aortic geometries were reconstructed to develop patient-specific finite element models, which incorporated material properties and wall thickness experimentally measured from biaxial stretching. A multiplicative approach was used to account for prestress geometry from in vivo magnetic resonance imaging. Pressure loading to systemic pressure (120/80) was performed using LS-DYNA software (LSTC Inc, Livermore, Calif). RESULTS: At systole, first principal stresses were 809 kPa (25%-75% interquartile range, 691-1219 kPa), 567 kPa (485-675 kPa), 637 kPa (555-755 kPa), and 382 kPa (334-413 kPa) at the autograft sinotubular junction, sinuses, annulus, and ascending aorta, respectively. Second principal stresses were 360 kPa (310-426 kPa), 355 kPa (320-394 kPa), 272 kPa (252-319 kPa), and 184 kPa (147-222 kPa) at the autograft sinotubular junction, sinuses, annulus, and ascending aorta, respectively. Mean autograft diameters were 29.9 ± 2.7 mm, 38.3 ± 5.3 mm, and 26.6 ± 4.0 mm at the sinotubular junction, sinuses, and annulus, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Peak first principal stresses were mainly located at the sinotubular junction, particularly when Dacron reinforcement was used. Patient-specific simulations lay the foundation for predicting autograft dilatation in the future after understanding biomechanical behavior during long-term follow-up.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".