A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Finite element and photoelastic modelling of an abdominal aortic aneurysm: a comparative study. | LitMetric

Finite element and photoelastic modelling of an abdominal aortic aneurysm: a comparative study.

Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin

Department of Mechanical, Aeronautical and Biomedical Engineering, Centre for Biomedical Engineering Research and Material Surface Science Institute, University of Limerick, Castletroy, Limerick, Ireland.

Published: January 2013

Rupture prediction of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) remains a clinical challenge. Finite element analysis (FEA) may allow for improved identification for intervention timing, but the method needs further substantiation. In this study, experimental photoelastic method and finite element techniques were compared using an idealised AAA geometry. There was good agreement between the numerical and experimental results. At the proximal and distal end of the AAA model, the maximum differences in principle strain for an internal pressure of 120 mmHg had differences ranging from 0.03 to 10.01%. The maximum difference in principle strain for the photoelastic and the finite element model at a pressure of 120 mmHg was 0.167 and 0.158, respectively. The current research strengthens the case for using FEA as an adjunct to the current clinical practice of utilising diameter measurement for intervention timing.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2011.574618DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

finite element
16
abdominal aortic
8
intervention timing
8
principle strain
8
pressure 120 mmhg
8
finite
4
element photoelastic
4
photoelastic modelling
4
modelling abdominal
4
aortic aneurysm
4

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!