Suppr超能文献

用于腹主动脉瘤破裂风险评估的生物力学指标

Biomechanical Indices for Rupture Risk Estimation in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms.

作者信息

Leemans Eva L, Willems Tineke P, van der Laan Maarten J, Slump Cornelis H, Zeebregts Clark J

机构信息

1 Department of Surgery, Division of Vascular Surgery, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, the Netherlands.

2 Department of Biomechanical Engineering and Physics, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

J Endovasc Ther. 2017 Apr;24(2):254-261. doi: 10.1177/1526602816680088. Epub 2016 Nov 21.

Abstract

PURPOSE

To review the use of biomechanical indices for the estimation of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture risk, emphasizing their potential use in a clinical setting.

METHODS

A search of the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Compendex databases was made up to June 2015 to identify articles involving biomechanical analysis of AAA rupture risk. Outcome variables [aneurysm diameter, peak wall stress (PWS), peak wall shear stress (PWSS), wall strain, peak wall rupture index (PWRI), and wall stiffness] were compared for asymptomatic intact AAAs vs symptomatic or ruptured AAAs. For quantitative analysis of the pooled data, a random effects model was used to calculate the standard mean differences (SMDs) with the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the biomechanical indices.

RESULTS

The initial database searches yielded 1894 independent articles of which 19 were included in the analysis. The PWS was significantly higher in the symptomatic/ruptured group, with a SMD of 1.11 (95% CI 0.93 to 1.26, p<0.001). Likewise, the PWRI was significantly higher in the ruptured or symptomatic group, with a SMD of 1.15 (95% CI 0.30 to 2.01, p=0.008). After adjustment for the aneurysm diameter, the PWS remained higher in the ruptured or symptomatic group, with a SMD of 0.85 (95% CI 0.46 to 1.23, p<0.001). Less is known of the wall shear stress and wall strain indices, as too few studies were available for analysis.

CONCLUSION

Biomechanical indices are a promising tool in the assessment of AAA rupture risk as they incorporate several factors, including geometry, tissue properties, and patient-specific risk factors. However, clinical implementation of biomechanical AAA assessment remains a challenge owing to a lack of standardization.

摘要

目的

回顾生物力学指标在评估腹主动脉瘤(AAA)破裂风险中的应用,重点强调其在临床环境中的潜在用途。

方法

检索截至2015年6月的PubMed、Embase、Scopus和Compendex数据库,以识别涉及AAA破裂风险生物力学分析的文章。比较无症状完整AAA与有症状或破裂AAA的结局变量[动脉瘤直径、峰值壁应力(PWS)、峰值壁剪切应力(PWSS)、壁应变、峰值壁破裂指数(PWRI)和壁刚度]。对于汇总数据的定量分析,使用随机效应模型计算生物力学指标的标准平均差(SMD)及其95%置信区间(CI)。

结果

初步数据库检索产生1894篇独立文章,其中19篇纳入分析。有症状/破裂组的PWS显著更高,SMD为1.11(95%CI 0.93至1.26,p<0.001)。同样,破裂或有症状组的PWRI显著更高,SMD为1.15(95%CI 0.30至2.01,p=0.008)。在调整动脉瘤直径后,破裂或有症状组的PWS仍然更高,SMD为0.85(95%CI 0.46至1.23,p<0.001)。对于壁剪切应力和壁应变指标了解较少,因为可供分析的研究太少。

结论

生物力学指标是评估AAA破裂风险的一种有前景的工具,因为它们纳入了多个因素,包括几何形状、组织特性和患者特定风险因素。然而,由于缺乏标准化,生物力学AAA评估的临床应用仍然是一项挑战。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验