A non-biological model system to simulate the in vivo mechanical behavior of prosthetic meshes

Is there any objective and independent characterization and modeling of soft biological tissues?

The characterization of soft tissue raises several difficulties. Indeed, soft biological tissues usually shrink when dissected from their in vivo location. This shrinkage is characteristic of the release of residual stresses, since soft tissues are indeed often pre-stressed in their physiological configuration. During experimental loading, large extension at very low level of force are expected and assumed to be related to the progressive recruitment and stretching of fibers. However, the first phase of the mechanical test is also aiming at recovering the pre-stressed in vivo behavior. As a consequence, the initial phase, corresponding to the recovering of prestress and/or recruitment of fiberes, is questionable and frequently removed. One of the preferred methods to erase it consists in applying a preforce or prestress to the sample: this allows to easily get rid of the sample retensioning range. However this operation can impact the interpretation of the identified mechanical parameters. This study presents an evaluation of the impact of the data processing on the mechanical properties of a numerically defined material. For this purpose, a finite element simulation was performed to replicate a uniaxial tensile test on a biological soft tissue sample. The influence of different pre-stretches on the mechanical parameters of a second order Yeoh model was investigated. The Yeoh mechanical parameters, or any other strain energy density, depend strongly on any pre- and post-processing choices: they adapt to compensate the error made when choosing an arbitrary level of prestretch or prestress. This observation spreads to any modeling approach used in soft tissues. Mechanical parameters are indeed naturally bound to the choice of the pre-stretch (or pre-stress) through the elongation and the constitutive law. Regardless of the model, it would therefore be pointless to compare mechanical parameters if the conditions for the processing of experimental raw data are not fully documented.

Fluid-structure interaction simulation of artificial textile reinforced aortic heart valve: Validation with an in-vitro test

Prosthetic heart valves deployed in the left heart (aortic and mitral) are subjected to harsh hemodynamical conditions. Most of the tissue engineered heart valves have been developed for the low pressure pulmonary position because of the difficulties in fabricating a mechanically strong valve, able to withstand the systemic circulation. This necessitates the use of reinforcing scaffolds, resulting in a tissue-engineered textile reinforced tubular aortic heart valve. Therefore, to better design these implants, material behaviour of the composite, valve kinematics and its hemodynamical response need to be evaluated. Experimental assessment can be immensely time consuming and expensive, paving way for numerical studies. In this work, the material properties obtained using the previously proposed multi-scale numerical method for textile composites was evaluated for its accuracy. An in silico immersed boundary (IB) fluid structure interaction (FSI) simulation emulating the in vitro experiment was set-up to evaluate and compare the geometric orifice area and flow rate for one beat cycle. Results from the in silico FSI simulation were found to be in good coherence with the in vitro test during the systolic phase, while mean deviation of approximately 9% was observed during the diastolic phase of a beat cycle. Merits and demerits of the in silico IB-FSI method for the presented case study has been discussed with the advantages outweighing the drawbacks, indicating the potential towards an effective use of this framework in the development and analysis of heart valves.

Mechanical behavior of surgical meshes for abdominal wall repair: In vivo versus biaxial characterization

Despite the widespread use of synthetic meshes in the surgical treatment of the hernia pathology, the election criteria of a suitable mesh for specific patient continues to be uncertain. Thus, in this work, we propose a methodology to determine in advance potential disadvantages on the use of certain meshes based on the patient-specific abdominal geometry and the mechanical features of the certain meshes. To that purpose, we have first characterized the mechanical behavior of four synthetic meshes through biaxial tests. Secondly, two of these meshes were implanted in several New Zealand rabbits with a total defect previously created on the center of the abdominal wall. After the surgical procedure, specimen were subjected to in vivo pneumoperitoneum tests to determine the immediate post-surgical response of those meshes after implanted in a healthy specimen. Experimental performance was recorded by a stereo rig with the aim of obtaining quantitative information about the pressure-displacement relation of the abdominal wall. Finally, following the procedure presented in prior works (Simón-Allué et al., 2015, 2017), a finite element model was reconstructed from the experimental measurements and tests were computationally reproduced for the healthy and herniated cases. Simulations were compared and validated with the in vivo behavior and results were given along the abdominal wall in terms of displacements, stresses and strain. Mechanical characterization of the meshes revealed Surgipro^TM as the most rigid implant and Neomesh SuperSoft® as the softer, while other two meshes (Neomesh Soft®, Neopore®) remained in between. These two meshes were employed in the experimental study and resulted in similar effect in the abdominal wall cavity and both were close to the healthy case. Simulations confirmed this result while showed potential objections in the case of the other two meshes, due to high values in stresses or elongation that may led to discomfort in real tissue. The use of this methodology on human surgery may provide the surgeons with reliable and useful information to avoid certain meshes on specific-patient treatment.

Characterization of a new decellularized bovine pericardial biological mesh: Structural and mechanical properties

Implants made from naturally-derived biomaterials, also called biological meshes or biomeshes, typically derive from decellularized extracellular matrix of either animal or human tissue. Biomeshes have many biomedical applications such as ligament repair, bone and cartilage regeneration and soft tissue replacement. Bovine collagen is one of the most widely used and abundantly available xenogenic materials. In particular, bovine pericardium is widely used as extracellular matrix bioprosthetic tissue. The efficiency of a pericardial mesh to function as scaffold depends on the quality of the decellularization protocol used. Moreover, the biomesh mechanical features are critical for a successful surgical repair process, as they must reproduce the biological properties of the autologous tissue. Different methods of physical, chemical, or enzymatic decellularization exist, but no one has proved to be ideal. Therefore, in the present study, we developed a novel decellularization protocol for a bovine pericardium-derived biomesh. We characterized the biomesh obtained by comparing some ultrastructural, physical and mechanical features to a reference commercial biomesh. Quantification revealed that our novel decellularization process removed about 90% of the native pericardial DNA. Microscopic and ultrastructural analysis documented the maintenance of the physiological structure of the pericardial collagen. Moreover, mechanical tests showed that both the extension and resilience of the new biomesh were statistically higher than the commercial control ones. The results presented in this study demonstrate that our protocol is promising in preparing high quality bovine pericardial biomeshes, encouraging further studies to validate its use in tissue engineering and regenerative medicine protocols.

Biaxial analysis of synthetic scaffolds for hernia repair demonstrates variability in mechanical anisotropy, non-linearity and hysteresis

BACKGROUND

Over the past 60 years, the soft tissue repair market has grown to include over 50 types of hernia repair materials. Surgeons typically implant these materials in the orientation that provides maximum overlap of the mesh over the defect, with little regard for mechanical properties of the mesh material. If the characteristics of the meshes were better understood, an appropriate material could be identified for each patient, and meshes could be placed to optimize integration with neighboring tissue and avoid the mechanical mis-match that can lead to impaired graft fixation. The purpose of this study was to fully characterize and compare the mechanical properties of thirteen types of hernia repair materials via planar biaxial tensile testing.

METHODS

Equibiaxial (i.e., equal simultaneous loading in both directions) and strip biaxial (i.e., loading in one direction with the other direction held fixed) tests were utilized as physiologically relevant loading regimes. After applying a 0.1N pre-load on each arm, samples were subjected to equibiaxial cyclic loading using a triangular waveform to 2.5mm displacement on each arm at 0.1Hz for 10 cycles. Samples were then subjected to two strip biaxial tests (using the same cyclic loading protocol), where extension was applied along a single axis with the other axis held fixed.

RESULTS

The thirteen evaluated mesh types exhibited a wide range of mechanical properties. Some were nearly isotropic (C-QUR™, DUALMESH(®), PHYSIOMESH™, and PROCEED(®)), while others were highly anisotropic (Ventralight™ ST, Bard™ Mesh, and Bard™ Soft Mesh). Some displayed nearly linear behavior (Bard™ Mesh), while others were non-linear with a long toe region followed by a sharp rise in tension (INFINIT(®)). These materials are currently utilized in clinical settings as if they are uniform and interchangeable, and clearly this is not the case. The mechanical properties most advantageous for successful hernia repairs are currently only vaguely described in the clinical literature. The characteristics of the human abdominal wall must be extensively characterized to provide a thorough understanding of the tissue being reinforced/replaced by these meshes. A better understanding of these mechanical differences would enable matching of patient characteristics to a specific mesh with the properties best suited to that particular repair.