FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 9000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Home / Equine Research Bank / Artif Organs / Comparison of tensile properties of xenopericardium from thr...
Artificial organs2019; 44(3); 278-287; doi: 10.1111/aor.13552

Comparison of tensile properties of xenopericardium from three animal species and finite element analysis for bioprosthetic heart valve tissue.

Abstract: Bioprosthetic heart valves still have poor long-term durability due to calcification and mechanical failure. The function and performance of bioprostheses is known to depend on the collagen architecture and mechanical behavior of the target tissue. So it is necessary to select an appropriate tissue for such prostheses. In this study, porcine, equine, and bovine pericardia were compared histologically and mechanically. The specimens were analyzed under light microscopy. The planar biaxial tests were performed on the tissue samples by applying synchronic loads along the axial (fiber direction) and perpendicular directions. The measured biaxial data were then fitted into both the modified Mooney-Rivlin model and the anisotropic four parameter Fung-type model. The modified Mooney-Rivlin model was applied to the modeling of the bovine, equine, and porcine pericardia using finite element analysis. The equine pericardium illustrated a wavy collagen bundle architecture similar to bovine pericardium, whereas the collagen bundles in the porcine pericardium were thinner and structured. Wavy pericardia may be preferable candidates for transcutaneous aortic valves because they are less likely to be delaminated during crimping. Based on the biaxial tensile test, the specimens indicated some degree of anisotropy; the anisotropy rates of the equine specimens were almost identical, and higher than the other two specimens. In general, porcine pericardium appeared stiffer, based on the greater strain energy magnitude and the average slope of the stress-stretch curves. Moreover, it was less distensible (due to lower areal strain) than the other two pericardial tissues. Furthermore, the porcine model induced localized high stress regions during the systolic and diastolic phases of the cardiac cycle. However, increased mechanical stress on the bioprosthetic leaflets may cause tissue degeneration and reduce the long-term durability of the valve. Based on our observations, the pericardial specimens behaved as anisotropic and nonlinear tissues-well-characterized by both the modified Mooney-Rivlin and the Fung-type models. The results indicate that, compared to bovine pericardium, equine tissue is mechanically and histologically more appropriate for manufacturing heart valve prostheses. The results of this study can be used in the design and manufacture of bioprosthetic heart valves.
© 2019 International Center for Artificial Organs and Transplantation and Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 2019-09-01 PubMed ID: 31386771DOI: 10.1111/aor.13552Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Comparative Study
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The study compares the tensile properties of pericardium tissue from three different animal species (pig, horse, and cow) to determine the most suitable for use in heart valve prosthetics. Findings suggest that equine pericardium is mechanically and histologically preferable for this application.

Tissue Selection for Bioprosthetic Heart Valves

  • The research focuses on the need for improved long-term durability in bioprosthetic (biologically-derived) heart valves. Current valves often fail over time due to calcification and mechanical stresses.
  • To find a solution, the researchers examined tissues from different animal species’ pericardium (heart sac). The tissues in this study were obtained from pigs (porcine), horses (equine), and cows (bovine).
  • The performance of such bioprosthetic heart valves relies on the collagen structure and mechanical behavior of the tissue from which they are made. Hence, the selection of an appropriate tissue is essential.

Methodology and Testing

  • The researchers compared the tissues both histologically (tissue structure and composition using a microscope) and mechanically.
  • The samples underwent planar biaxial tests, a type of mechanical testing that applies forces along two perpendicular directions (called axial and perpendicular directions).
  • The generated data were fitted into the modified Mooney-Rivlin and Fung-type models — mathematical models used to describe the mechanical behavior of elastic materials.
  • Tissues from all three animal types were simulated using a technique called finite element analysis, which provides detailed predictions of how structures will react to stresses and strains.

Findings and Implications

  • Among the three tissues, the equine pericardium had a similar collagen architecture to bovine pericardium, while porcine pericardium had thinner, more structured collagen bundles.
  • This wavy architecture demonstrated by equine and bovine pericardia could make them better candidates for heart valves since they exhibit less delamination (layer separation) during crimping, a procedure typically performed during valve implantation.
  • Porcine pericardium proved stiffer but less distensible (flexible), consequently showing massive strain energy and inducing high stress regions during the heart’s pumping cycle. This increased stress could cause early degeneration and reduce the valve’s life expectancy.
  • Because of these results, the equine pericardium emerges as the most suitable tissue based on its superior mechanical and histological properties for heart valve prosthesis.
  • The findings in this research have beneficial implications in designing and manufacturing more durable, successful bioprosthetic heart valves using equine pericardial tissues.

Cite This Article

APA
Rassoli A, Fatouraee N, Guidoin R, Zhang Z. (2019). Comparison of tensile properties of xenopericardium from three animal species and finite element analysis for bioprosthetic heart valve tissue. Artif Organs, 44(3), 278-287. https://doi.org/10.1111/aor.13552

Publication

Artificial organs
ISSN: 1525-1594
NlmUniqueID: 7802778
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 44
Issue: 3
Pages: 278-287

Researcher Affiliations

Rassoli, Aisa
  • Biological Fluid Mechanics Research Laboratory, Biomedical Engineering Faculty, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, Iran.
  • Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval and Centre de Recherche du CHU, Q, Canada.
Fatouraee, Nasser
  • Biological Fluid Mechanics Research Laboratory, Biomedical Engineering Faculty, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran, Iran.
Guidoin, Robert
  • Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval and Centre de Recherche du CHU, Q, Canada.
Zhang, Ze
  • Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval and Centre de Recherche du CHU, Q, Canada.

MeSH Terms

  • Animals
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Bioprosthesis
  • Cattle
  • Collagen / analysis
  • Computer Simulation
  • Elasticity
  • Finite Element Analysis
  • Heart Valve Prosthesis
  • Horses
  • Materials Testing
  • Models, Biological
  • Pericardium / chemistry
  • Pericardium / ultrastructure
  • Swine
  • Tensile Strength

References

This article includes 35 references
  1. Smuts AN. Design of tissue leaflets for a percutaneous aortic valve. 2009.
  2. Dominik J, Zacek P. Heart valve surgery: an illustrated guide. 2010.
  3. Manji RA, Lee W, Cooper DK. Xenograft bioprosthetic heart valves: past, present and future. Int J Surg 2015;23:280-4.
  4. Garcı́a Páez JM, Jorge-Herrero E, Carrera A, Millán I, Rocha A, Calero P. Ostrich pericardium, a biomaterial for the construction of valve leaflets for cardiac bioprostheses: mechanical behaviour, selection and interaction with suture materials. Biomaterials 2001;22:2731-40.
  5. Arcidiacono G, Corvi A, Severi T. Functional analysis of bioprosthetic heart valves. J Biomech 2005;38:1483-90.
  6. Maestro MM, Turnay J, Olmo N, Fernández P, Suárez D, Páez JMG. Biochemical and mechanical behavior of ostrich pericardium as a new biomaterial. Acta Biomater 2006;2:213-9.
  7. Claramunt R, Páez JG, Alvarez L, Spottorno J, Ros A, Casado MC. Short-term fatigue testing can predict medium-term pericardium behavior. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2011;4:1929-35.
  8. Smuts AN, Blaine DC, Scheffer C, Weich H, Doubell AF, Dellimore KH. Application of finite element analysis to the design of tissue leaflets for a percutaneous aortic valve. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2011;4:85-98.
  9. Gauvin R, Marinov G, Mehri Y, Klein J, Li B, Larouche D. A comparative study of bovine and porcine pericardium to highlight their potential advantages to manufacture percutaneous cardiovascular implants. J Biomater Appl 2013;28:552-65.
  10. Abbasi M, Azadani AN. Leaflet stress and strain distributions following incomplete transcatheter aortic valve expansion. J Biomech 2015;48:3663-71.
  11. Sun W, Sacks MS, Scott MJ. Numerical simulations of the planar biaxial mechanical behavior of biological materials. Bioengineering Conference, Florida 2003;1-2.
  12. Humphrey JD, Strumpf RK, Yin FCP. Determination of a constitutive relation for passive myocardium: a new functional form. J Biomech Eng 1990;112:333-9.
  13. Humphrey JD, Strumpf RK, Yin FCP. Determination of a constitutive relation for passive myocardium: II. Parameter estimation. J Biomech Eng 1990;112:340-6.
  14. Fung YC, Fronek K, Patitucci P. Pseudoelasticity of arteries and the choice of its mathematical expression. Am J Physiol 1979;237:620-31.
  15. Holzapfel GA, Gasser TC, Ogden RW. A new constitutive framework for arterial wall mechanics and a comparative study of material models. J Elasticity 2000;61:1-48.
  16. Holzapfel GA, Eberlein R, Wriggers P, Weizsäcker HW. Large strain analysis of soft biological membranes: Formulation and finite element analysis. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 1996;132:45-61.
  17. Holzapfel GA, Gasser TC, Ogden RW. Comparison of a multi-layer structural model for arterial walls with a Fung-type model, and issues of material stability. J Biomech Eng 2004;126:264-75.
  18. Holzapfel GA. Similarities between soft biological tissues and rubber like materials. 2005. p. 607-17.
  19. Fung YC. What are the residual stresses doing in our blood vessels?. Ann Biomed Eng 1991;19:237-49.
  20. Kural MH, Cai M, Tang D, Gwyther T, Zheng J, Billiar KL. Planar biaxial characterization of diseased human coronary and carotid arteries for computational modeling. J Biomech 2012;45:790-8.
  21. Tang D, Yang C, Kobayashi S, Zheng J, Woodard PK, Teng Z. 3D MRI-based anisotropic FSI models with cyclic bending for human coronary atherosclerotic plaque mechanical analysis. J Biomech Eng 2009;131:061010.
  22. Holzapfel GA, Sommer G, Regitnig P. Anisotropic mechanical properties of tissue components in human atherosclerotic plaques. J Biomech Eng 2004;126:657-65.
  23. Bellini C, Glass P, Sitti M, Di Martino ES. Biaxial mechanical modeling of the small intestine. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2011;4:1727-40.
  24. Gharaie SH, Morsi Y. A novel design of a polymeric aortic valve. Int J Artif Organs 2015;38:259-70.
  25. Miyamotto M, Del Valle CE, Moreira RCR, Timi JRR. Comparative analysis of rupture resistance between glutaraldehyde-treated bovine pericardium and great Saphenous vein. J Vascular Brasileiro 2009;8:103-11.
  26. Sun W, Sacks MS, Scott MJ. Effects of boundary conditions on the estimation of the planar biaxial mechanical properties of soft tissues. J Biomech Eng 2005;127:709-15.
  27. Fehervary H, Smoljkić M, Vander Sloten J, Famaey N. Planar biaxial testing of soft biological tissue using rakes: a critical analysis of protocol and fitting process. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2016;61:135-51.
  28. Nolan DR, McGarry JP. On the correct interpretation of measured force and calculation of material stress in biaxial tests. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 2016;53:187-99.
  29. Yin FCP, Strumpf RK, Chew PH, Zeger SL. Quantification of the mechanical properties of noncontracting canine myocardium under simultaneous biaxial loading. J Biomech 1987;20:577-89.
  30. Humphrey JD, Strumpf RK, Yin FCP. A constitutive theory for biomembranes: application to epicardial mechanics. J Biomech Eng 1992;114:461-6.
  31. Sokolis DP. Multiaxial mechanical behaviour of the passive ureteral wall: experimental study and mathematical characterization. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 2012;15:1145-56.
  32. Auricchio F, Conti M, Ferrara A, Morganti S, Reali A. Patient-specific simulation of a stentless aortic valve implant: the impact of fibres on leaflet performance. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng 2014;17:277-85.
  33. Guidoin R, Bes TM, Cianciulli TF, Klein J, Li B, Gauvin R. Cuspal dehiscence at a post and along the stent cloth in a bovine pericardium heart valve implanted for seven years. J Long-Term Eff Med 2012;22:95-111.
  34. Mohammadi S, Baillot R, Voisine P, Mathieu P, Dagenais F. Structural deterioration of the Freestyle aortic valve: mode of presentation and mechanisms. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2006;132:401-6.
  35. Ozaki S, Herijgers P, Segers P. Distortion of the stentless porcine valve induces accelerated leaflet fibrosis and calcification in juvenile sheep. J Heart Valve Dis 1999;8:34-41.

Citations

This article has been cited 6 times.
  1. Stracuzzi A, Britt BR, Mazza E, Ehret AE. Risky interpretations across the length scales: continuum vs. discrete models for soft tissue mechanobiology. Biomech Model Mechanobiol 2022 Apr;21(2):433-454.
    doi: 10.1007/s10237-021-01543-4pubmed: 34985590google scholar: lookup
  2. Edlinger C, Bannehr M, Wernly B, Kücken T, Okamoto M, Lichtenauer M, Hähnel V, Reiners D, Neuss M, Butter C. Direct Flow Medical vs. Edwards Sapien 3 Prosthesis: A Propensity Matched Comparison on Intermediate Safety and Mortality. Front Cardiovasc Med 2021;8:671719.
    doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.671719pubmed: 34222370google scholar: lookup
  3. Elassal AA, Al-Radi OO, Zaher ZF, Dohain AM, Abdelmohsen GA, Mohamed RS, Fatani MA, Abdelmotaleb ME, Noaman NA, Elmeligy MA, Eldib OS. Equine pericardium: a versatile alternative reconstructive material in congenital cardiac surgery. J Cardiothorac Surg 2021 Apr 23;16(1):110.
    doi: 10.1186/s13019-021-01494-ypubmed: 33892770google scholar: lookup
  4. Masoumi SF, Rassoli A, Changizi S, Ravaghi S, Fatouraee N. Comparative analysis of ovine and human aortic valve tissue for bioprosthetic valve development using relaxation tests and numerical simulation. Sci Rep 2026 Feb 4;16(1).
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-026-35729-6pubmed: 41639159google scholar: lookup
  5. Hu X, He Z, Wang H. Effects of a Drying Treatment on the Mechanical Properties and Hemodynamic Characteristics of Bovine Pericardial Bioprosthetic Valves. J Funct Biomater 2025 Nov 25;16(12).
    doi: 10.3390/jfb16120434pubmed: 41440611google scholar: lookup
  6. Khayami M, Rassoli A, Feizkhah A. Optimal geometrical selection of skin mesh: experimental analysis and numerical optimization. Sci Rep 2025 Jul 1;15(1):21263.
    doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-04829-0pubmed: 40593934google scholar: lookup
Subscribe to our newsletter
Join 99,357 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.