4.6 Article

Characterization of mechanical properties of pericardium tissue using planar biaxial tension and flexural deformation

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2017.08.039

Keywords

Constitutive modeling; Inverse finite element analysis; Transcatheter aortic valve replacement

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL104080, HL108240]
  2. NATIONAL HEART, LUNG, AND BLOOD INSTITUTE [R01HL104080, R21HL108240] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Flexure is an important mode of deformation for native and bioprosthetic heart valves. However, mechanical characterization of bioprosthetic leaflet materials has been done primarily through planar tensile testing. In this study, an integrated experimental and computational cantilever beam bending test was performed to characterize the flexural properties of glutaraldehyde-treated bovine and porcine pericardium of different thicknesses. A strain-invariant based structural constitutive model was used to model the pericardial mechanical behavior quantified through the bending tests of this study and the planar biaxial tests previously performed. The model parameters were optimized through an inverse finite element (FE) procedure in order to describe both sets of experimental data. The optimized material properties were implemented in FE simulations of transcatheter aortic valve (TAV) deformation. It was observed that porcine pericardium TAV leaflets experienced significantly more flexure than bovine when subjected to opening pressurization, and that the flexure may be overestimated using a constitutive model derived from purely planar tensile experimental data. Thus, modeling of a combination of flexural and biaxial tensile testing data may be necessary to more accurately describe the mechanical properties of pericardium, and to computationally investigate bioprosthetic leaflet function and design.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available