Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Standard

Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques. / Bechsgaard, Tommy; Lindskow, Thomas; Lading, Troels; Røpcke, Diana M; Nygaard, Hans; Johansen, Peter; Nielsen, Sten L; Hasenkam, J Michael.

I: Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, Bind 28, Nr. 1, 2019, s. 112-119.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

Bechsgaard, T, Lindskow, T, Lading, T, Røpcke, DM, Nygaard, H, Johansen, P, Nielsen, SL & Hasenkam, JM 2019, 'Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques', Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, bind 28, nr. 1, s. 112-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivy187

APA

Bechsgaard, T., Lindskow, T., Lading, T., Røpcke, D. M., Nygaard, H., Johansen, P., Nielsen, S. L., & Hasenkam, J. M. (2019). Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, 28(1), 112-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivy187

CBE

Bechsgaard T, Lindskow T, Lading T, Røpcke DM, Nygaard H, Johansen P, Nielsen SL, Hasenkam JM. 2019. Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. 28(1):112-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivy187

MLA

Bechsgaard, Tommy o.a.. "Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques". Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2019, 28(1). 112-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivy187

Vancouver

Bechsgaard T, Lindskow T, Lading T, Røpcke DM, Nygaard H, Johansen P o.a. Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques. Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2019;28(1):112-119. https://doi.org/10.1093/icvts/ivy187

Author

Bechsgaard, Tommy ; Lindskow, Thomas ; Lading, Troels ; Røpcke, Diana M ; Nygaard, Hans ; Johansen, Peter ; Nielsen, Sten L ; Hasenkam, J Michael. / Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques. I: Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery. 2019 ; Bind 28, Nr. 1. s. 112-119.

Bibtex

@article{64ba1518380f4271bf6d4a5ca3e984e9,
title = "Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques",
abstract = "OBJECTIVES: Understanding the biomechanical impact of aortic valve-sparing techniques is important in an era in which surgical techniques are developing and are increasingly being used based on biomechanical understanding that is essential in the refining of existing techniques. The objective of this study was to describe how the valve-sparing remodelling (Yacoub) and reimplantation (David Type-1) techniques affect the biomechanics of the native aortic root in terms of force distribution and geometrical changes.METHODS: Two force transducers were implanted into 22 pigs, randomized to 1 of 3 groups (David = 7, native = 7 and Yacoub = 8) along with 11 sonomicrometry crystals and 2 pressure catheters. Force and geometry data were combined to obtain the local structural stiffness in different segments of the aortic root.RESULTS: The radial structural stiffness was not different between groups (P = 0.064) at the annular level; however, the David technique seemed to stabilize the aortic annulus more than the Yacoub technique. In the sinotubular junction, the native group was more compliant (P = 0.036) with the right-left coronary segment than the intervention groups. Overall, the native aortic root appeared to be more dynamic at both the annular level and the sinotubular junction than both intervention groups.CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the David procedure may stabilize the aortic annulus more than the Yacoub procedure, whereas the leaflet opening area was larger in the latter (P = 0.030). No difference (P = 0.309) was found in valve-opening delay between groups. The 2 interventions show similar characteristics at the sinotubular junction, whereas the David technique seemed more restrictive at the annular level than the Yacoub technique.",
author = "Tommy Bechsgaard and Thomas Lindskow and Troels Lading and R{\o}pcke, {Diana M} and Hans Nygaard and Peter Johansen and Nielsen, {Sten L} and Hasenkam, {J Michael}",
year = "2019",
doi = "10.1093/icvts/ivy187",
language = "English",
volume = "28",
pages = "112--119",
journal = "Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery",
issn = "1569-9293",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Biomechanical characterization and comparison of different aortic root surgical techniques

AU - Bechsgaard, Tommy

AU - Lindskow, Thomas

AU - Lading, Troels

AU - Røpcke, Diana M

AU - Nygaard, Hans

AU - Johansen, Peter

AU - Nielsen, Sten L

AU - Hasenkam, J Michael

PY - 2019

Y1 - 2019

N2 - OBJECTIVES: Understanding the biomechanical impact of aortic valve-sparing techniques is important in an era in which surgical techniques are developing and are increasingly being used based on biomechanical understanding that is essential in the refining of existing techniques. The objective of this study was to describe how the valve-sparing remodelling (Yacoub) and reimplantation (David Type-1) techniques affect the biomechanics of the native aortic root in terms of force distribution and geometrical changes.METHODS: Two force transducers were implanted into 22 pigs, randomized to 1 of 3 groups (David = 7, native = 7 and Yacoub = 8) along with 11 sonomicrometry crystals and 2 pressure catheters. Force and geometry data were combined to obtain the local structural stiffness in different segments of the aortic root.RESULTS: The radial structural stiffness was not different between groups (P = 0.064) at the annular level; however, the David technique seemed to stabilize the aortic annulus more than the Yacoub technique. In the sinotubular junction, the native group was more compliant (P = 0.036) with the right-left coronary segment than the intervention groups. Overall, the native aortic root appeared to be more dynamic at both the annular level and the sinotubular junction than both intervention groups.CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the David procedure may stabilize the aortic annulus more than the Yacoub procedure, whereas the leaflet opening area was larger in the latter (P = 0.030). No difference (P = 0.309) was found in valve-opening delay between groups. The 2 interventions show similar characteristics at the sinotubular junction, whereas the David technique seemed more restrictive at the annular level than the Yacoub technique.

AB - OBJECTIVES: Understanding the biomechanical impact of aortic valve-sparing techniques is important in an era in which surgical techniques are developing and are increasingly being used based on biomechanical understanding that is essential in the refining of existing techniques. The objective of this study was to describe how the valve-sparing remodelling (Yacoub) and reimplantation (David Type-1) techniques affect the biomechanics of the native aortic root in terms of force distribution and geometrical changes.METHODS: Two force transducers were implanted into 22 pigs, randomized to 1 of 3 groups (David = 7, native = 7 and Yacoub = 8) along with 11 sonomicrometry crystals and 2 pressure catheters. Force and geometry data were combined to obtain the local structural stiffness in different segments of the aortic root.RESULTS: The radial structural stiffness was not different between groups (P = 0.064) at the annular level; however, the David technique seemed to stabilize the aortic annulus more than the Yacoub technique. In the sinotubular junction, the native group was more compliant (P = 0.036) with the right-left coronary segment than the intervention groups. Overall, the native aortic root appeared to be more dynamic at both the annular level and the sinotubular junction than both intervention groups.CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, the David procedure may stabilize the aortic annulus more than the Yacoub procedure, whereas the leaflet opening area was larger in the latter (P = 0.030). No difference (P = 0.309) was found in valve-opening delay between groups. The 2 interventions show similar characteristics at the sinotubular junction, whereas the David technique seemed more restrictive at the annular level than the Yacoub technique.

U2 - 10.1093/icvts/ivy187

DO - 10.1093/icvts/ivy187

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 29961835

VL - 28

SP - 112

EP - 119

JO - Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

JF - Interactive Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery

SN - 1569-9293

IS - 1

ER -