Logo image
Back
Prediction of rupture risk in abdominal aortic aneurysm during observation: Wall stress versus diameter
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Prediction of rupture risk in abdominal aortic aneurysm during observation: Wall stress versus diameter

Mark F FILLINGER, Steven P MARRA, M. L RAGHAVAN and Francis E KENNEDY
Journal of vascular surgery, Vol.37(4), pp.724-732
2003
DOI: 10.1067/mva.2003.213
PMID: 12663969
url
https://doi.org/10.1067/mva.2003.213View
Published (Version of record) Open Access

Abstract

Objectives: We previously showed that peak abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall stress calculated for aneurysms in vivo is higher at rupture than at elective repair. The purpose of this study was to analyze rupture risk over time in patients under observation. Methods: Computed tomography (CT) scans were analyzed for patients with AAA when observation was planned for at least 6 months. AAA wall stress distribution was computationally determined in vivo with CT data, three-dimensional computer modeling, finite element analysis (nonlinear hyperelastic model depicting aneurysm wall behavior), and blood pressure during observation. Results: Analysis included 103 patients and 159 CT scans (mean follow-up, 14 +/- 2 months per CT). Forty-two patients were observed with no intervention for at least 1 year (mean follow-up, 28 +/- 3 months). Elective repair was performed within 1 year in 39 patients, and emergent repair was performed in 22 patients (mean, 6 +/- 1 month after CT) for rupture (n = 14) or acute severe pain. Significant differences were found for initial diameter (observation, 4.9 +/-.1 cm; elective repair, 5.9 +/-.1 cm; emergent repair, 6.1 +/-.2 cm; P <.0001) and initial peak wall stress (38 +/- 1 N/cm(2), 42 +/- 2 n/cm(2), 58 +/- 4 N/cm(2), respectively; P <.0001), but peak wall stress appeared to better differentiate patients who later required emergent repair (elective vs emergent repair: diameter, 3% difference, P =.5; stress, 38% difference, P <.0001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for predicting rupture were better for peak wall stress (sensitivity, 94%; specificity,81%; accuracy, 85% [with 44 N/cm(2) threshold]) than for diameter (81%, 70%, 73%, respectively [with optimal 5.5 cm threshold). With proportional hazards analysis, peak wall stress (relative risk, 25x) and gender (relative risk, 3x) were the only significant independent predictors of rupture. Conclusions: For AAAs under observation, peak AAA wall stress seems superior to diameter in differentiating patients who will experience catastrophic outcome. Elevated wall stress associated with rupture is not simply an acute event near the time of rupture.
 Cardiology. Vascular system Biological and medical sciences Medical sciences Blood and lymphatic vessels Diseases of the aorta

Details

Metrics

19 Record Views
546 Times Cited - Web of Science
Logo image