Numerical model of a valvuloplasty balloon: in vitro validation in a rapid-prototyped phantom. Issue 1 (December 2016)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Biffi, Benedetta; Bosi, Giorgia; Lintas, Valentina; Jones, Rod; Tzamtzis, Spyros; Burriesci, Gaetano; Migliavacca, Francesco; Taylor, Andrew; Schievano, Silvia; Biglino, Giovanni
• Is Part Of: Biomedical engineering online. Volume 15:Issue 1(2016)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 16
• Publication Date: 2016-12
• Subjects: Valvuloplasty balloons -- Percutaneous procedures -- Validation of computational models -- Implantation site material properties -- 3D printing/rapid prototyping materials; Biomedical engineering -- Periodicals; 610.2805
• DOI: 10.1186/s12938-016-0155-4
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1475-925X

Abstract

Abstract Background Patient-specific simulations can provide insight into the mechanics of cardiovascular procedures. Amongst cardiovascular devices, non-compliant balloons are used in several minimally invasive procedures, such as balloon aortic valvuloplasty. Although these balloons are often included in the computer simulations of these procedures, validation of the balloon behaviour is often lacking. We therefore aim to create and validate a computational model of a valvuloplasty balloon. Methods A finite element (FE) model of a valvuloplasty balloon (Edwards 9350BC23) was designed, including balloon geometry and material properties from tensile testing. Young's Modulus and distensibility of different rapid prototyping (RP) rubber-like materials were evaluated to identify the most suitable compound to reproduce the mechanical properties of calcified arteries in which such balloons are likely to be employed clinically. A cylindrical, simplified implantation site was 3D printed using the selected material and the balloon was inflated inside it. The FE model of balloon inflation alone and its interaction with the cylinder were validated by comparison with experimental Pressure–Volume (P –V ) and diameter–Volume (d –V ) curves. Results Root mean square errors (RMSE ) of pressure and diameter wereRMSE P = 161.98 mmHg (3.8 % of the maximum pressure) andRMSE d = 0.12 mm (<0.5 mm, within the acquisition system resolution) for the balloon alone, andRMSE P = 94.87 mmHg (1.9 % of the maximum pressure) andRMSE d = 0.49 mm for the balloon inflated inside the simplified implantation site, respectively. Conclusions This validated computational model could be used to virtually simulate more realistic valvuloplasty interventions.