Research Papers

A Methodology for the Derivation of Unloaded Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Geometry With Experimental Validation

[+] Author and Article Information
Santanu Chandra, Vimalatharmaiyah Gnanaruban

Department of Biomedical Engineering,
University of Texas at San Antonio,
San Antonio, TX 78249

Fabian Riveros

Aragon Institute of Engineering Research,
Universidad de Zaragoza,
Zaragoza 50018, Spain

Jose F. Rodriguez

Aragon Institute of Engineering Research,
Universidad de Zaragoza,
Zaragoza 50018, Spain;
Department of Chemistry, Materials, and
Chemical Engineering “Giulio Natta,”
Politecnico di Milano,
Milano 20133, Italy

Ender A. Finol

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Texas at San Antonio,
EB 3.04.23,
One UTSA Circle,
San Antonio, TX 78249
e-mail: ender.finol@utsa.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received December 3, 2014; final manuscript received August 1, 2016; published online August 30, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Jonathan Vande Geest.

J Biomech Eng 138(10), 101005 (Aug 30, 2016) (11 pages) Paper No: BIO-14-1602; doi: 10.1115/1.4034425 History: Received December 03, 2014; Revised August 01, 2016

In this work, we present a novel method for the derivation of the unloaded geometry of an abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) from a pressurized geometry in turn obtained by 3D reconstruction of computed tomography (CT) images. The approach was experimentally validated with an aneurysm phantom loaded with gauge pressures of 80, 120, and 140 mm Hg. The unloaded phantom geometries estimated from these pressurized states were compared to the actual unloaded phantom geometry, resulting in mean nodal surface distances of up to 3.9% of the maximum aneurysm diameter. An in-silico verification was also performed using a patient-specific AAA mesh, resulting in maximum nodal surface distances of 8 μm after running the algorithm for eight iterations. The methodology was then applied to 12 patient-specific AAA for which their corresponding unloaded geometries were generated in 5–8 iterations. The wall mechanics resulting from finite element analysis of the pressurized (CT image-based) and unloaded geometries were compared to quantify the relative importance of using an unloaded geometry for AAA biomechanics. The pressurized AAA models underestimate peak wall stress (quantified by the first principal stress component) on average by 15% compared to the unloaded AAA models. The validation and application of the method, readily compatible with any finite element solver, underscores the importance of generating the unloaded AAA volume mesh prior to using wall stress as a biomechanical marker for rupture risk assessment.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Kent, K. C. , 2014, “ Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” N. Engl. J. Med., 371(22), pp. 2101–2108. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Newman, A. B. , Arnold, A. M. , Burke, G. L. , O'Leary, D. H. , and Manolio, T. A. , “ Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality in Older Adults With Small Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Detected by Ultrasonography: The Cardiovascular Health Study,” Ann. Intern. Med., 134(3), pp. 182–190. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Karkos, C. , Mukhopadhyay, U. , Papakostas, I. , Ghosh, J. , Thomson, G. , and Hughes, R. , 2000, “ Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: The Role of Clinical Examination and Opportunistic Detection,” Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg., 19(3), pp. 299–303. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Brown, L. C. , and Powell, J. T. , 1999, “ Risk Factors for Aneurysm Rupture in Patients Kept Under Ultrasound Surveillance, UK Small Aneurysm Trial Participants,” Ann. Surg., 230(3), pp. 289–296; discussion 296–297. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Limet, R. , Sakalihassan, N. , and Albert, A. , 1991, “ Determination of the Expansion Rate and Incidence of Rupture of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” J. Vasc. Surg., 14(4), pp. 540–548. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Fillinger, M. F. , Raghavan, M. L. , Marra, S. P. , Cronenwett, J. L. , and Kennedy, F. E. , 2002, “ In Vivo Analysis of Mechanical Wall Stress and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Rupture Risk,” J. Vasc. Surg., 36(3), pp. 589–597. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Fillinger, M. F. , Marra, S. P. , Raghavan, M. L. , and Kennedy, F. E. , 2003, “ Prediction of Rupture Risk in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm During Observation: Wall Stress Versus Diameter,” J. Vasc. Surg., 37(4), pp. 724–732. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Raghavan, M. L. , and Vorp, D. A. , 2000, “ Toward a Biomechanical Tool to Evaluate Rupture Potential of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: Identification of a Finite Strain Constitutive Model and Evaluation of Its Applicability,” J. Biomech., 33(4), pp. 475–482. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Thubrikar, M. J. , Al-Soudi, J. , and Robicsek, F. , 2001, “ Wall Stress Studies of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm in a Clinical Model,” Ann. Vasc. Surg., 15(3), pp. 355–366. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Truijers, M. , Pol, J. A. , Schultzekool, L. J. , van Sterkenburg, S. M. , Fillinger, M. F. , and Blankensteijn, J. D. , 2007, “ Wall Stress Analysis in Small Asymptomatic, Symptomatic and Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg., 33(4), pp. 401–407. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Di Martino, E. S. , Guadagni, G. , Fumero, A. , Ballerini, G. , Spirito, R. , Biglioli, P. , and Redaelli, A. , 2001, “ Fluid-Structure Interaction Within Realistic Three-Dimensional Models of the Aneurysmatic Aorta as a Guidance to Assess the Risk of Rupture of the Aneurysm,” Med. Eng. Phys., 23(9), pp. 647–655. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Finol, E. A. , and Amon, C. H. , 2002, “ Flow-Induced Wall Shear Stress in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Part II—Pulsatile Flow Hemodynamics,” Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng., 5(4), pp. 319–328. [CrossRef]
Figueroa, A. , Vignon-Clementel, I. , Jansen, K. , Hughes, T. J. R. , and Taylor, C. A. , 2005, “ Simulation of Blood Flow and Vessel Deformation in Three-Dimensional, Patient-Specific Models of the Cardiovascular System Using a Novel Method for Fluid-Solid Interactions,” Fluid Structure Interaction and Moving Boundary Problems: No. 3, S. Chakrabarti , S. Hernandez , and C. A. Brebbia , eds., WIT Press, Ashurst, UK, pp. 143–152.
Wolters, B. J. , Rutten, M. C. , Schurink, G. W. , Kose, U. , de Hart, J. , and van de Vosse, F. N. , 2005, “ A Patient-Specific Computational Model of Fluid-Structure Interaction in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” Med. Eng. Phys., 27(10), pp. 871–883. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Leung, J. H. , Wright, A. R. , Cheshire, N. , Crane, J. , Thom, S. A. , Hughes, A. D. , and Xu, X. Y. , 2006, “ Fluid Structure Interaction of Patient Specific Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: A Comparison With Solid Stress Models,” Biomed. Eng. Online, 5, p. 33. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Papaharilaou, Y. , Ekaterinaris, J. A. , Manousaki, E. , and Katsamouris, A. N. , 2007, “ A Decoupled Fluid Structure Approach for Estimating Wall Stress in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” J. Biomech., 40(2), pp. 367–377. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bluestein, D. , Dumont, K. , De Beule, M. , Ricotta, J. , Impellizzeri, P. , Verhegghe, B. , and Verdonck, P. , 2009, “ Intraluminal Thrombus and Risk of Rupture in Patient Specific Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm—FSI Modelling,” Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng., 12(1), pp. 73–81. [CrossRef]
Rissland, P. , Alemu, Y. , Einav, S. , Ricotta, J. , and Bluestein, D. , 2009, “ Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Risk of Rupture: Patient-Specific FSI Simulations Using Anisotropic Model,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 131(3), p. 031001. [CrossRef]
Scotti, C. M. , Jimenez, J. , Muluk, S. C. , and Finol, E. A. , 2008, “ Wall Stress and Flow Dynamics in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Finite Element Analysis vs. Fluid-Structure Interaction,” Comput. Methods Biomech. Biomed. Eng., 11(3), pp. 301–322. [CrossRef]
Chandra, S. C. , Raut, S. S. , Jana, A. , Biederman, R. W. , Doyle, M. , Muluk, S. C. , and Finol, E. A. , 2013, “ Fluid Structure Interaction Modeling of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: The Impact of Patient Specific Inflow Conditions and Fluid/Solid Coupling,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 135(8), p. 081001. [CrossRef]
Vande Geest, J. P. , Sacks, M. S. , and Vorp, D. A. , 2006, “ A Planar Biaxial Constitutive Relation for the Luminal Layer of Intra-Luminal Thrombus in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” J. Biomech., 39(13), pp. 2347–2354. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Marra, S. P. , Raghavan, M. L. , Whittaker, D. R. , Fillinger, M. F. , Chen, D. T. , Dwyer, J. M. , Tsapakos, M. J. , and Kennedy, F. E. , 2005, “ Estimation of the Zero-Pressure Geometry of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms From Dynamic Magnetic Resonance Imaging,” 2005 Summer Bioengineering Conference, Vail, CO, June 22–26, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, Abstract 298571.
Raghavan, M. L. , Ma, B. , and Fillinger, M. F. , 2006, “ Non-Invasive Determination of Zero-Pressure Geometry of Arterial Aneurysms,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 34(9), pp. 1414–1419. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lu, J. , Zhou, X. , and Raghavan, M. L. , 2008, “ Inverse Method of Stress Analysis for Cerebral Aneurysms,” Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol., 7(6), pp. 477–486. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lu, J. , Zhou, X. , and Raghavan, M. L. , 2007, “ Inverse Elastostatic Stress Analysis in Pre-Deformed Biological Structures: Demonstration Using Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” J. Biomech., 40(3), pp. 693–696. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
de Putter, S. , Wolters, B. J. , Rutten, M. C. , Breeuwer, M. , Gerritsen, F. A. , and van de Vosse, F. N. , 2007, “ Patient-Specific Initial Wall Stress in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms With a Backward Incremental Method,” J. Biomech., 40(5), pp. 1081–1090. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Riveros, F. , Chandra, S. C. , Finol, E. A. , Gasser, T. C. , and Rodriguez, J. F. , 2013, “ A Pull-Back Algorithm to Determine the Unloaded Vascular Geometry in Anisotropic Hyperelastic AAA Passive Mechanics,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 41(4), pp. 694–708. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Govindjee, S. , and Mihalic, P. A. , 1996, “ Computational Methods for Inverse Finite Elastostatics,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 136(1–2), pp. 47–57. [CrossRef]
Shield, R. T. , 1967, “ Inverse Deformation Results in Finite Elasticity,” Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 18(4), pp. 490–500. [CrossRef]
Carlson, D. E. , 1969, “ Inverse Deformation Results for Elastic Materials,” Z. Angew. Math. Phys., 20(2), pp. 261–263. [CrossRef]
Shum, J. , Di Martino, E. S. , Goldhammer, A. , Goldman, D. , Acker, L. , Patel, G. , Ng, J. H. , Martufi, G. , and Finol, E. A. , 2010, “ Semi-Automatic Vessel Wall Detection and Quantification of Wall Thickness in Computed Tomography Images of Human Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms,” Med. Phys., 37(2), pp. 638–648. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Shum, J. , Martufi, G. , Di Martino, E. S. , Washington, C. B. , Grisafi, J. , Muluk, S. C. , and Finol, E. A. , 2011, “ Quantitative Assessment of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Geometry,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 39(1), pp. 277–286. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Shum, J. , Xu, A. , Chatnuntawech, I. , and Finol, E. A. , 2011, “ A Framework for the Automatic Generation of Surface Topologies for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Models,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 39(1), pp. 249–259. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Raghavan, M. L. , Kratzberg, J. , Castro de Tolosa, E. M. , Hanaoka, M. M. , Walker, P. , and da Silva, E. S. , 2006, “ Regional Distribution of Wall Thickness and Failure Properties of Human Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm,” J. Biomech., 39(16), pp. 3010–3016. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Bihari, P. , Shelke, A. , New, T. H. , Mularczyk, M. , Nelson, K. , Schmandra, T. , Knez, P. , and Schmitz-Rixen, T. , 2013, “ Strain Measurement of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm With Real-Time 3D Ultrasound Speckle Tracking,” Eur. J. Vasc. Endovasc. Surg., 45(4), pp. 315–323. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Goergen, C. J. , Azuma, J. , Barr, K. N. , Magdefessel, L. , Kallop, D. Y. , Gogineni, A. , Grewall, A. , Weimer, R. M. , Connolly, A. J. , Dalman, R. L. , Taylor, C. A. , Tsao, P. S. , and Greve, J. M. , 2011, “ Influences of Aortic Motion and Curvature on Vessel Expansion in Murine Experimental Aneurysms,” Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., 31(2), pp. 270–279. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Seong, J. , Sadasivan, C. , Onizuka, M. , Gounis, M. J. , Christian, F. , Miskolczi, L. , Wakhloo, A. K. , and Lieber, B. B. , 2005, “ Morphology of Elastase-Induced Cerebral Aneurysm Model in Rabbit and Rapid Prototyping of Elastomeric Transparent Replicas,” Biorheology, 42(5), pp. 345–361. [PubMed]
Rodriguez, J. F. , Ruiz, C. , Doblare, M. , and Holzapfel, G. A. , 2008, “ Mechanical Stress in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms: Influence of Diameter, Asymmetry, and Material Anisotropy,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 130(2), p. 021023. [CrossRef]
Speelman, L. , Bosboom, E. M. , Schurink, G. W. , Buth, J. , Breeuwer, M. , Jacobs, M. J. , and van de Vosse, F. N. , 2009, “ Initial Stress and Nonlinear Material Behavior in Patient-Specific AAA Wall Stress Analysis,” J. Biomech., 42(11), pp. 1713–1719. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Gee, M. W. , Reeps, C. , Eckstein, H. H. , and Wall, W. A. , 2009, “ Prestressing in Finite Deformation Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Simulation,” J. Biomech., 42(11), pp. 1732–1739. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Gee, M. W. , Forster, C. , and Wall, W. A. , 2010, “ A Computational Strategy for Prestressing Patient-Specific Biomechanical Problems Under Finite Deformation,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Biomed. Eng., 26(1), pp. 52–72. [CrossRef]
Hsu, M. C. , and Bazilevs, Y. , 2011, “ Blood Vessel Tissue Prestress Modeling for Vascular Fluid-Structure Interaction Simulation,” Finite Elem. Anal. Des., 47(6), pp. 593–599. [CrossRef]
DiMartino, E. S. , Bohra, A. , VandeGeest, J. P. , Gupta, N. Y. , Makaroun, M. S. , and Vorp, D. A. , 2006, “ Biomechanical Properties of Ruptured Versus Electively Repaired Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Wall Tissue,” J. Vasc. Surg., 43(3), pp. 570–576. [CrossRef] [PubMed]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Flowchart of the proposed iterative algorithm to generate a predicted unloaded geometry of the solid domain (Sug), i.e., AAA wall and ILT, and the fluid domain (Fug), i.e., AAA lumen, from a CT image-based geometry (Sib)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The displacements of a selected node in the principal directions, Dx, Dy, and Dz, are drawn against the pressure, which is normalized to the diastolic pressure. The displacements are extrapolated by second-order quadratic fitting (solid lines) and were found to be nonlinear in varying degrees. Linear extrapolation (dashed lines) is also shown for comparison.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Model AAA12 used for the in-silico verification of the algorithm. Wall geometry and ILT distribution are shown.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

AAA phantom for the experimental validation: (a) phantom representing a 4.7 cm aneurysm and (b) schematic of pressure loading of the phantom for validation of the unloaded geometry algorithm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Mesh sensitivity study of the unloaded AAA phantom subject to 120 mm Hg equivalent loading. The mean wall displacement converged within 2% of the 5 × 106 element mesh (5 M) with 150,000 volume elements. However, a mesh size in the range of 250,000–300,000 elements is preferred to execute the unloaded geometry algorithm, since the incremental improvement in mean wall displacement, which is measured as its percentage deviation by a mesh relative to the immediately finer mesh, is highest (1.7%) in this size range.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Convergence of the algorithm for the AAA12 model. Maximum and average nodal distances between the estimated and the actual unloaded geometries are depicted. The inset shows the unloaded geometry of the aneurysm at each iteration.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Qualitative visualization of the distance distribution between the predicted unloaded geometry (Sug) estimated from the three pressurized states (80 mm Hg (a), 120 mm Hg (b), and 140 mm Hg (c) gauge) and the actual unloaded geometry (UG). The maximum distance was obtained along the distal anterior wall for all three loading conditions (see black arrow), and it is evident that higher pressures lead to larger distances between the surfaces.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison of the predicted unloaded geometry (Sug) ((a), (d), and (g)), the actual unloaded geometry (UG) ((b), (e), and (h)), and the μCT image-based geometry (Sib) ((c), (f), and (i)) of the AAA phantom based on the first principal stress distribution. The applied intraluminal pressure was equivalent to 80 mm Hg for (a)–(c); 120 mm Hg for (d)–(f); and 140 mm Hg gauge for (g)–(i).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

(a) Logarithmic representation and normalized relative L2-norm errors of the nodal distances between the CT image-based geometry (Sib) and the predicted diastolic geometry obtained with the unloaded geometry (Sug) when pressurized to the diastolic pressure, with the number of iterations as a measure of performance of the algorithm for the AAA1, AAA2, and AAA3 meshes. (b) Sib of AAA1 with overlapping Sug demonstrating the differences in the geometries.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Predicted peak wall stress with the CT-based (solid blue bars) and the unloaded (striped red bars) geometries at their stress-free reference configurations

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Views of the CT image-based (Sib) and unloaded (Sug) FE models for aneurysms AAA1 and AAA2 showing the distribution of first principal stress at the normal physiological systolic pressures. For the Sug cases, the unloaded geometries have been estimated with the patient-specific diastolic pressures and the normal physiological systolic pressure.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In