Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T21:27:51.574Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Static Mechanical Properties of Helically Constructed Polyurethane Vascular Grafts Before and after Implantation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2011

Miranda L. Weygang
Affiliation:
Centre for Biomaterials, University of Toronto, 124 Edward St., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M5G 1G6
J. Michael Lee
Affiliation:
Centre for Biomaterials, University of Toronto, 124 Edward St., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M5G 1G6
Gregory J. Wilson
Affiliation:
Department of Pathology, The Hospital for Sick Children, Toronto, Ontario CANADA M5G 1X8
Petr Klement
Affiliation:
Centre for Biomaterials, University of Toronto, 124 Edward St., Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M5G 1G6
Allen G. Binnington
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Studies, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, Ontario, CANADA N1G 2W1
Get access

Abstract

The influence of mechanical properties on the acute and chronic success of vascular grafts remains the subject of considerable debate. It is widely held that the matching of some set of mechanical properties at the anastomosis between a natural vessel and a vascular graft will optimize the likelihood of clinical sucess. Investigations in this area have largely concentrated on compliance (defined as the percentage change in diameter per unit change in pressure) as the parameter to be matched across the anastomosis. However, compliance represents only one out of a set of candidate parameters (including elastic moduli, Poisson ratios, admittance, distensibility, and hydraulic impedance among others) and there is no definitive evidence that it is in any way the most important mechanical parameter to be considered. As well, the concentration on compliance has resulted in the failure to examine the importance of the longitudinal behavior of the vascular grafts. The longitudinal properties of any vessel can profoundly influence the observed circumferential behavior; however, this is, at best, only implicit in the onedimensional compliance parameter.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1988

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Lee, J.M., Wilson, G.J., Biomaterials 7, 423 (1986)Google Scholar
2. Nahon, D., Lee, J.M., Wilson, G.J., Clinical Mater. 1, 177 (1986)Google Scholar
3. How, T.V., Clarke, R.M., J. Biomech. 17, 597 (1984)Google Scholar
4. Lee, J. M., Wilson, G.J., MacGregor, D.C., Leidner, J., Proc. 4th Annual Conference. Canadian Biomaterials Society (1983), p. 28.1Google Scholar
5. Hasegawa, M., Azuma, T., J. Biomech. 12, 509 (1979)Google Scholar
6. White, R., Goldberg, L., Hirose, F., Klein, S., Gosco, P., Miranda, R., Long, J., Nelson, R., Shors, E, Biomat. Med. Dev. Artif. Organs 11, 21 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7. Leidner, J., Wong, E.W.C., MacGregor, D.C., Wilson, G.J., J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 17, 229 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8. Wilson, G.J., MacGregor, D.C., Klement, P., Lee, J.M., Nido, P.J. del, Wong, E.W.C., Leidner, J., Trans. Am. Soc. Artif. Int. Organs 23, 260, 1983 Google Scholar
9. Weygang, M.L., M.A.Sc. Thesis, Dept. Metallurgy Mat. Sci., University of Toronto (1988)Google Scholar
10. Van Loon, P., Klip, W., Bradley, E.L., Biorheology 14, 181 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11. Patel, D.J., Fry, D.L., Circ. Res. 19, 1101 (1966)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12. Dobrin, P.B., J. Biomech. 19, 351 (1986)Google Scholar
13. White, R.A., Klein, S.R., Shors, E.C., J. Cardiovasc. Surg. 28, 485 (1987)Google Scholar