Advertisement

Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology

, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp 1709–1730 | Cite as

Failure damage mechanical properties of thoracic and abdominal porcine aorta layers and related constitutive modeling: phenomenological and microstructural approach

  • Juan A. Peña
  • Miguel A. Martínez
  • Estefanía PeñaEmail author
Original Paper
  • 148 Downloads

Abstract

Despite increasing experimental and analytical efforts to investigate the irreversible effects of arterial tissue failure, the underlying mechanisms are still poorly understood. The goal of this study was to characterize the failure properties of the intact wall and each separated layer (intima, media, and adventitia) of the descending thoracic and infrarenal abdominal aorta and to test the hypothesis that the failure properties of layer-separated tissue depend on the location of the aorta. To test this hypothesis, we performed uniaxial tests to study the mechanical behavior of both intact and layer-separated porcine aortic tissue samples taken from descending thoracic and infrarenal abdominal aorta until complete failure. The fracture stress is higher in the infrarenal abdominal aorta than in the equivalent descending thoracic aorta. It was also found that the extrapolation of the elastic mechanical properties from the physiological to the supra-physiological regime for characterizing the mechanical response of the aorta would be inappropriate. Finally, we report values of constitutive parameters using phenomenological and microstructural damage models based on continuum damage mechanics theory. The phenomenological damage model gives an excellent fit to the experimental data compared to the microstructural damage model. Although the fitting results of the phenomenological model are better, the microstructural models can include physically motivated aspects obtained from experiments.

Keywords

Failure properties Damage mechanics Thoracic and abdominal aorta Layer separation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Financial support for this research was provided by the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness through Research Project DPI2016-76630-C2-1-R; the Department of Industry and Innovation (Government of Aragon) through the research group Grant T24-17R (Fondo Social Europeo); and the Instituto de Salud Carlos III (ISCIII) through the CIBER initiative. The work was performed by the ICTS “NANBIOSIS” specifically by the Tissue and Scaffold Characterization Unit (U13), of the CIBER in Bioengineering, Biomaterials and Nanomedicine (CIBER-BBN at the University of Zaragoza).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest

References

  1. Alastrué V et al (2009) Anisotropic micro-sphere-based finite elasticity applied to blood vessel modelling. J Mech Phys Solids 57:178–203zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alastrué V et al (2008) Experimental study and constitutive modelling of the passive mechanical properties of the ovine infrarenal vena cava tissue. J Biomech 41:3038–3045CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Alastrué V et al (2010) On the use of bingham statistical distribution in microsphere-based constitutive models for arterial tissue. Mech Res Commun 37:700–706zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balzani D et al (2006) Simulation of discontinuous damage incorporating residual stress in circumferentially overstretched atherosclerotic arteries. Acta Biomater 2:609–618CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barra JG et al (1993) Assessment of smooth muscle contribution to descending thoracic aortic elastic mechanics in conscious dogs. Circ Res 73:1040–1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bažant P, Oh BH (1986) Efficient numerical integration on the surface of a sphere. ZAMM-Z Angew Math Mech 66:37–49MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Calvo B et al (2007) An uncoupled directional damage model for fibered biological soft tissues: formulation and computational aspects. Int J Numer Meth Eng 69:2036–2057zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carew TE et al (1968) Compressibility of the arterial wall. Circ Res 23:61–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Demiray H (1972) A note on the elasticity of soft biological tissues. J Biomech 5:309–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diani J et al (2009) A review on the Mullins effect. Eur Polym J 45:601–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Duprey A et al (2016) Biaxial rupture properties of ascending thoracic aortic aneurysms. Acta Biomat 42:273–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ehret AE, Itskov M (2009) Modeling of anisotropic softening phenomena: application to soft biological tissues. Int J Plasticity 25:901–919zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Eppell SJ et al (2006) Nano measurements with micro-devices: mechanical properties of hydrated collagen fibrils. J R Soc Interface 3:117–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferrara A, Pandolfi A (2010) A numerical study of arterial media dissection processes. Int J Fract 166:21–33zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Flory PJ (1961) Thermodynamic relations for high elastic materials. Trans Faraday Soc 57:829–838MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Forsell C, Gasser TC (2011) Numerical simulation of the failure of ventricular tissue due to deeper penetration, the impact of constitutive properties. J Biomech 44:45–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fung YC (1993) Biomechanics. Mechanical properties of living tissues, 2nd edn. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  18. García A et al (2013) Determination and modeling of the inelasticity over the length of the porcine carotid artery. ASME J Biomech Eng 135:031004-1Google Scholar
  19. Gasser TC (2011) An irreversible constitutive model for fibrous soft biological tissue: a 3-D microfiber approach with demonstrative application to abdominal aortic aneurysms. Acta Biom 7:2457–2466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gasser TC et al (2012) Spatial orientation of collagen fibers in the abdominal aortic aneurysm’s wall and its relation to wall mechanics. Acta Biomat 8:3091–3103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Gasser TC, Holzapfel GA (2006) Modeling the propagation of arterial dissection. Eur J Mech A/Solids 25:617–633MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gasser TC et al (2006) Hyperelastic modelling of arterial layers with distributed collagen fibre orientations. J R Soc Interface 3:15–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gültekin O et al (2016) A phase-field approach to model fracture of arterial walls: theory and finite element analysis. Comput Meth Appl Mech Eng 312:542–566MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Guo X, Kassab GS (2003) Variation of mechanical properties along the length of the aorta in C57bl/6 mice. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 285:H2614–H2622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hamedzadeh A et al (2018) On the constitutive modelling of recruitment and damage of collagen fibres in soft biological tissues. Eur J Mech A/Solids 72:483–496MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hang HC, Fung YC (1995) Longitudinal strain of canine and porcine aortas. J Biomech 28:637–641CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Hernández Q, Peña E (2016) Failure properties of vena cava tissue due to deep penetration during filter insertion. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 15:845–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Hokanson J, Yazdami S (1997) A constitutive model of the artery with damage. Mech Res Commun 24:151–159zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Holzapfel GA et al (2005) Determination of the layer-specific mechanical properties of human coronary arteries with non-atherosclerotic intimal thickening, and related constitutive modelling. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 289:H2048–H2058CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Holzapfel GA et al (2000) A new constitutive framework for arterial wall mechanics and a comparative study of material models. J Elasticity 61:1–48MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Humphrey JD (2002) Cardiovascular solid mechanics: cells, tissues, and organs. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Hurschler C et al (1997) A structurally based stress-stretch relationship for tendon and ligament. ASME J Biomech Eng 119:392–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kamenskiy AV et al (1998) Biaxial mechanical properties of the human thoracic and abdominal aorta, common carotid, subclavian, renal and common iliac arteries. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 13:1341–1359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kim J, Baek S (2011) Circumferential variations of mechanical behavior of the porcine thoracic aorta during inflation test. J Biomech 44:1941–1947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kim J et al (2013) Longitudinal differences in the mechanical properties of the thoracic aorta depend on circumferential regions. J Biomed Mater Res Part A 101:1525–1529CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kim J-H et al (2012) Experimental characterization of rupture in human aortic aneurysms using a full-field measurement technique. Biomechan Model Mechanobiol 11:841–853CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lally C et al (2004) Elastic Behavior of Porcine Coronary Artery Tissue under Uniaxial and Equibiaxial Tension. Ann Biomed Eng 32:1355–1364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lebedev VI, Laikov DN (1999) A quadrature formula for the sphere of the 131st algebraic order of accuracy. Doklady Math 59:477–481Google Scholar
  39. Li D, Robertson AM (2009) A structural multi-mechanism damage model for cerebral arterial tissue. ASME J Biomech Eng 131(101013):1–8zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  40. Lillie MA et al (2012) Contribution of elastin and collagen to the inflation response of the pig thoracic aorta: assessing elastin’s role in mechanical homeostasis. J Biomech 45:2133–2141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Lu X et al (2003) Shear modulus of porcine coronary artery: contributions of media and adventitia. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 285:H1966–H1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Maher E et al (2012) Site specific inelasticity of arterial tissue. J Biomech 45:1393–1399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Marquardt DW (1963) An algorithm for least-squares estimation of nonlinear parameters. Siam J Appl Math 11:431–441MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mullins L (1947) Effect of stretching on the properties of rubber. Rubber Res 16:275–289Google Scholar
  45. Noble C et al (2016) Creating a model of diseased artery damage and failure from healthy porcine aorta. J Mech Behav Biomed 60:378–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Nolan DR, McGarry JP (2016) On the compressibility of arterial tissue. Ann Biomed Eng 44:993–1007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peña E (2011a) A rate dependent directional damage model for fibred materials: application to soft biological tissues. Comp Mech 48:407–420MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Peña E (2011b) Damage functions of the internal variables for soft biological fibred tissues. Mech Res Commun 38:610–615zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Peña E (2011c) Prediction of the softening and damage effects with permanent set in fibrous biological materials. J Mech Phys Solids 59:1808–1822MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Peña E (2014) Computational aspects of the numerical modelling of softening, damage and permanent set in soft biological tissues. Comput Struct 130:57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Peña E et al (2010) A constitutive formulation of vascular tissue mechanics including viscoelasticity and softening behaviour. J Biomech 43:984–989CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Peña E, Doblare M (2009) An anisotropic pseudo-elastic approach for modelling Mullins effect in fibrous biological materials. Mech Res Commun 36:784–790zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Peña E et al (2009) On the Mullins effect and hysteresis of fibered biological materials: a comparison between continuous and discontinuous damage models. Int J Solids Struct 46:1727–1735zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Peña JA et al (2018) Over length quantification of the multiaxial mechanical properties of the ascending, descending and abdominal aorta using Digital Image Correlation. J Mech Behav Biomed 77:434–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Peña JA et al (2015) Layer-specific residual deformations and uniaxial and biaxial mechanical properties of thoracic porcine aorta. J Mech Behav Biomed 50:55–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Pierce DM et al (2015) Human thoracic and abdominal aortic aneurysmal tissues: Damage experiments, statistical analysis and constitutive modeling. J Mech Behav Biomed 41:92–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Polzer S et al (2015) Structure-based constitutive model can accurately predict planar biaxial properties of aortic wall tissue. Acta Biomater 14:133–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Raina A, Miehe C (2016) A phase-field model for fracture in biological tissues. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 15:479–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Rajagopal K, et al (2019) The mechanics of acute aortic dissection: measured calculations and calculated measures. J Thorac Cardiovasc SurgGoogle Scholar
  60. Rezakhaniha R et al (2012) Experimental investigation of collagen waviness and orientation in the arterial adventitia using confocal laser scanning microscopy. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 11:461–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rodríguez JF et al (2006) A stochastic-structurally based three dimensional finite-strain damage model for fibrous soft tissue. J Mech Phys Solids 54:564–886MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Schriefl A et al (2012) Determination of the layer-specific distributed collagen fiber orientations in human thoracic and abdominal aortas and common iliac arteries. J R Soc Interface 9:1275–1286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Sáez P et al (2012) Anisotropic microsphere-based approach to damage in soft fibered tissue. Biomechan Model Mechanobiol 11:595–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Sáez P et al (2016) Microstructural quantification of collagen fiber orientations and its integration in constitutive modeling of the porcine carotid artery. Acta Biomat 33:183–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Silver FH et al (2003) Mechanical behavior of vessel wall: a comparative study of aorta, vena cava, and carotid artery. Ann Biomed Eng 31:793–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Simo JC (1987) On a fully three-dimensional finite-strain viscoelastic damage model: formulation and computational aspects. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 60:153–173zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Sokolis DP (2010) A passive strain-energy function for elastic and muscular arteries: correlation of material parameters with histological data. Med Biol Eng Comput 48:507–518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Spencer AJM (1971) Theory of invariants continuum physics. Academic Press, New York, pp 239–253Google Scholar
  69. Volokh KY (2007a) Hyperelasticity with softening for modeling materials failure. J Mech Phys Solids 55:2237–2264MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Volokh KY (2007b) Prediction of arterial failure based on a microstructural bi-layer fiber-matrix model with softening. J Biomech 41:447–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Weisbecker H et al (2012) Layer-specific damage experiments and modeling of human thoracic and abdominal aortas with non-atherosclerotic intimal thickening. J Mech Behav Biomed 12:93–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Weisbecker H et al (2015) Constitutive modelling of arteries considering fibre recruitment and three-dimensional fibre distribution. J R Soc Interface 12:20150111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Wulandana R, Robertson AM (2005) An inelastic multi-mechanism constitutive equation for cerebral arterial tissue. Biomech Model Mechanbiol 4:235–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Zeinali-Davarani S et al (2013) Characterization of biaxial mechanical behavior of porcine aorta under gradual elastin degradation. Ann Biomed Eng 41:1528–1538CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Juan A. Peña
    • 1
    • 2
  • Miguel A. Martínez
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
  • Estefanía Peña
    • 1
    • 3
    • 4
    Email author
  1. 1.Aragón Institute of Engineering Research (I3A)University of ZaragozaZaragozaSpain
  2. 2.Department of Management and Manufacturing Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and ArchitectureUniversity of ZaragozaZaragozaSpain
  3. 3.CIBER de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina (CIBER-BBN)ZaragozaSpain
  4. 4.Mechanical Engineering DepartmentZaragozaSpain

Personalised recommendations