ArticleCardiovascular engineering and technology2024
Computational Comparison of the Mechanical Behavior of Aortic Stent-Grafts Derived from Auxetic Unit Cells.
Article in Cardiovascular engineering and technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Auxetic Stents as a Next Generation Solution for Vascular Diseases-A Review.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2026Review
- Design and Characterization of 3D Printed Auxetic PLA-HA Composite Scaffolds for Biomedical Application.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Recent Patents of Stent Grafts for Intravascular Aortic Repair.Recent patents on biotechnology · 2026Review
- Post-TEVAR Type A Aortic Dissection: Insights and Future Directions.Cardiovascular drugs and therapy · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeInappropriate stent-graft (SG) flexibility has been frequently associated with endovascular aortic repair (EVAR) complications such as endoleaks, kinks, and SG migration, especially in tortuous arteries. Stents derived from auxetic unit cells have shown some potential to address these issues as they offer an optimum trade-off between radial stiffness and bending flexibility.
methodsIn this study, we utilized an established finite element (FE)-based approach to replicate the mechanical response of a SG iliac limb derived from auxetic unit cells in a virtual tortuous iliac aneurysm using a combination of a 180° U-bend and intraluminal pressurization. This study aimed to compare the mechanical performance (flexibility and durability) of SG limbs derived from auxetic unit cells and two commercial SG limbs (Z-stented SG and circular-stented SG models) in a virtual tortuous iliac aneurysm. Maximal graft strain and maximum stress in stents were employed as criteria to estimate the durability of SGs, whereas the maximal luminal reduction rate and the bending stiffness were used to assess the flexibility of the SGs.
resultsSG limbs derived from auxetic unit cells demonstrated low luminal reduction (range 4-12%) with no kink, in contrast to Z-stented SG, which had a kink in its central area alongside a high luminal reduction (44%).
conclusionsSG limbs derived from auxetic unit cells show great promise for EVAR applications even at high angulations such as 180°, with acceptable levels of durability and flexibility.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.