Research on degenerative abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) is hampered by complex pathophysiology, sub-optimal pre-clinical models, and lack of effective medical therapies. In addition, trustworthiness of existing epidemiological data is impaired by elements of ambiguity, inaccuracy, and inconsistency. Our aim is to foster debate concerning the trustworthiness of AAA epidemiological data and to discuss potential solutions.
Methods
We searched the literature from the last five decades for relevant epidemiological data concerning AAA development, rupture, and repair. We then discussed the main issues burdening existing AAA epidemiological figures and proposed suggestions potentially beneficial to AAA diagnosis, prognostication, and management.
Results
Recent data suggest a heterogeneous scenario concerning AAA epidemiology with rates markedly varying by country and study cohorts. Overall, AAA prevalence seems to be decreasing worldwide while mortality is apparently increasing regardless of recent improvements in aortic-repair techniques. Prevalence and mortality are decreasing in high-income countries, whereas low-income countries show an increase in both. However, several pieces of information are missing or outdated, thus systematic renewal is necessary. Current AAA definition and surgical criteria do not consider inter-individual variability of baseline aortic size, further decreasing their reliability.
Conclusions
Switching from flat aortic-size thresholds to relative aortic indices would improve epidemiological trustworthiness regarding AAAs. Aortometry standardization focusing on simplicity, univocity, and accuracy is crucial. A patient-tailored approach integrating clinical data, multi-adjusted indices, and imaging parameters is desirable. Several novel imaging modalities boast promising profiles for investigating the aortic wall. New contrast agents, computational analyses, and artificial intelligence-powered software could provide further improvements.
LindemanJH. The pathophysiologic basis of abdominal aortic aneurysm progression: a critical appraisal. Expert Rev Cardiovasc Ther2015; 13: 839–851.
2.
SakutaAKimuraFAokaY, et al.Delayed enhancement on computed tomography in abdominal aortic aneurysm wall. Heart Ves2007; 22: 79–87.
3.
Van WalravenCWongJMorantK, et al.Incidence, follow-up, and outcomes of incidental abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Vasc Surg2010; 52: 282–289. DOI: 10.1016/J.JVS.2010.03.006.
4.
SampsonUKANormanPEFowkesFGR, et al.Estimation of global and regional incidence and prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysms 1990 to 2010. Glob Heart2014; 9: 159–170.
SampsonUKANormanPEFowkesFGR, et al.Global and regional burden of aortic dissection and aneurysms: mortality trends in 21 world regions, 1990 to 2010. Glob Heart2014; 9: 171–180.
7.
HowardDPJBanerjeeAFairheadJF, et al.Population-based study of incidence of acute abdominal aortic aneurysms with projected impact of screening strategy. J Am Heart Assoc2015; 4: e001926.
Scott RAP, Chichester Aneurysm Screening Group, Viborg Aneurysm Screening Study. A comparative study of the prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Australia. J Med Screen2001; 8: 46–50.
11.
LiXZhaoGZhangJ, et al.Prevalence and trends of the abdominal aortic aneurysms epidemic in general population - a meta-analysis. PLoS One2013; 8: e81260.
12.
StatherPWSidloffDARhemaIA, et al.A review of current reporting of abdominal aortic aneurysm mortality and prevalence in the literature. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2014; 47: 240–242.
13.
JohnstonKWRutherfordRBTilsonMD, et al.Suggested standards for reporting on arterial aneurysms. Subcommittee on reporting standards for arterial aneurysms, ad Hoc committee on reporting standards, society for vascular surgery and north American chapter, international society for cardiovascular surgery. J Vasc Surg1991; 13: 452–458.
14.
RogersISMassaroJMTruongQA, et al.Distribution, determinants, and normal reference values of thoracic and abdominal aortic diameters by computed tomography (from the framingham heart study). Am J Cardiol2013; 111: 1510–1516.
15.
SkotsimaraGAntonopoulosAOikonomouE, et al.Aortic wall inflammation in the pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of aortic aneurysms. Inflammation2022; 45: 965–976.
16.
DurieuxRVan DammeHLabropoulosN, et al.High prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm in patients with three-vessel coronary artery disease. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2014; 47: 273–278.
17.
KhashramMJonesGTRoakeJA. Prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) in a population undergoing computed tomography colonography in canterbury, New Zealand. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2015; 50: 199–205.
18.
LiWLuoSLuoJ, et al.Predictors associated with increased prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm in Chinese patients with atherosclerotic risk factors. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2017; 54: 43–49.
19.
HohneckAKeeseMRuemenapfG, et al.Prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm and associated lower extremity artery aneurysm in men hospitalized for suspected or known cardiopulmonary disease. BMC Cardiovasc Disord2019; 19: 284–287.
20.
TangWYaoLRoetkerNS, et al.Lifetime risk and risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysm in a 24-year prospective study: the ARIC study (atherosclerosis risk in communities). Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol2016; 36: 2468–2477.
21.
WanhainenAHultgrenRLinnéA, et al.Outcome of the Swedish nationwide abdominal aortic aneurysm screening program. Circulation2016; 134: 1141–1148.
22.
JacomelliJSummersLStevensonA, et al.Impact of the first 5 years of a national abdominal aortic aneurysm screening programme. Br J Surg2016; 103: 1125–1131.
23.
CarterJLMorrisDRSherlikerP, et al.Sex-specific associations of vascular risk factors with abdominal aortic aneurysm: findings from 1.5 million women and 0.8 million men in the United States and United Kingdom. J Am Heart Assoc2020; 9: e014748. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.119.014748.
24.
PalomboDLucertiniGPaneB, et al.District-based abdominal aortic aneurysm screening in population aged 65 years and older. J Cardiovasc Surg2010; 51: 777–782.
25.
SummersKLKerutEKSheahanCM, et al.Evaluating the prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the United States through a national screening database. J Vasc Surg2021; 73: 61–68.
26.
AltobelliEGianfeliceFAngelettiPM, et al.Abdominal aortic screening is a priority for health in smoker males: a study on central Italian population. Int J Environ Res Public Health2022; 19: 591.
27.
GianfagnaFVeronesiGTozziM, et al.Prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysms in the general population and in subgroups at high cardiovascular risk in Italy. Results of the RoCAV population based study. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2018; 55: 633–639.
28.
LindholtJSDiederichsenACRasmussenLM, et al.Survival, prevalence, progression and repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms: results from three randomised controlled screening trials over three decades. Clin Epidemiol2020; 12: 95–103.
29.
Gouveia e MeloRSilva DuarteGLopesA, et al.Incidence and prevalence of thoracic aortic aneurysms: a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies. Semin Thorac Cardiovasc Surg2022; 34: 1–16.
30.
UpchurchGRCriadoE. Aortic aneurysms – pathogenesis and treatment. Totowa, NJ: Humana Press, 2009. DOI: 10.1007/978-1-60327-204-9.
31.
SvensjöSBjörckMGürtelschmidM, et al.Low prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm among 65-year-old Swedish men indicates a change in the epidemiology of the disease. Circulation2011; 124: 1118–1123.
32.
AnjumAPowellJT. Is the incidence of abdominal aortic aneurysm declining in the 21st century? Mortality and hospital admissions for england & wales and scotland. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2012; 43: 161–166.
33.
BarbaÁVega de CénigaMEstalloL, et al.Prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm is still high in certain areas of southern Europe. Ann Vasc Surg2013; 27: 1068–1073.
34.
SvensjöSBjörckMWanhainenA. Update on screening for abdominal aortic aneurysm: a topical review. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2014; 48: 659–667.
WangZYouYYinZ, et al.Burden of aortic aneurysm and its attributable risk factors from 1990 to 2019: an analysis of the global burden of disease study 2019. Front Cardiovasc Med2022; 9: 901225.
37.
ChanWKYongEHongQ, et al.Systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm in Asian populations. J Vasc Surg2021; 73: 1069–1074.e1.
38.
SidloffDStatherPDattaniN, et al.Aneurysm global epidemiology study public health measures can further reduce abdominal aortic aneurysm mortality. Circulation2014; 129: 747–753.
39.
ChoiCAhnSMinSI, et al.Nationwide epidemiologic study of abdominal aortic aneurysms in korea: a cross-sectional study using national health insurance review and assessment Service data. Vasc Spec Int2019; 35: 193–201.
40.
BickerstaffLKHollierLHVan PeenenHJ, et al.Abdominal aortic aneurysms: the changing natural history. J Vasc Surg1984; 1: 6–12.
41.
SotoBVilaLDilméJF, et al.Increased peak wall stress, but not maximum diameter, is associated with symptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2017; 54: 706–711.
42.
LiSRReitzKMKennedyJ, et al.Epidemiology of age-sex-and race-specific hospitalizations for abdominal aortic aneurysms highlights gaps in current screening recommendations. J Vasc Surg2022; 76: 1216–1226.e4.
43.
KühnlAErkATrennerM, et al.Incidence, treatment and mortality in patients with abdominal aortic aneurysms: an analysis of hospital discharge data from 2005–2014. Dtsch Arztebl Int2017; 114: 391–398.
44.
TalvitieMStenmanMRoyJ, et al.Sex differences in rupture risk and mortality in untreated patients with intact abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Am Heart Assoc2021; 10: e019592–e019619.
45.
PatelPBDe GuerreLEVMMarcaccioCL, et al.Sex-specific criteria for repair should be utilized in patients undergoing aortic aneurysm repair. J Vasc Surg2022; 75: 515–525.
46.
BallardDJEtchasonJAHilborneLH, et al.Abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: a literature review and ratings of appropriateness and necessity. 1992. https://www.rand.org/pubs/joint_reports-health/JRA04.html (accessed 3 September 2022).
47.
FilardoGPowellJTMartinezMAM, et al.Surgery for small asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2015; 2015. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001835.
48.
PowellJTGotensparreSMSweetingMJ, et al.Rupture rates of small abdominal aortic aneurysms: a systematic review of the literature. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2011; 41: 2–10.
49.
Oliver-WilliamsCSweetingMJJacomelliJ, et al.Safety of men with small and medium abdominal aortic aneurysms under surveillance in the NAAASP. Circulation2019; 139: 1371–1380.
50.
GwonJGKwonTWChoYP, et al.Analysis of in hospital mortality and long-term survival excluding in hospital mortality after open surgical repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm. Ann Surg Treat Res2016; 91: 303–308.
51.
HallerSJAzarbalAFRugonyiS. Predictors of abdominal aortic aneurysm risks. Bioengineering2020; 7: 79.
52.
AzharBPatelSRHoltPJE, et al.Misdiagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm: systematic review and meta-analysis. J Endovasc Ther2014; 21: 568–575.
53.
SmidfeltKDrottCTörngrenK, et al.The impact of initial misdiagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms on lead times, complication rate, and survival. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2017; 54: 21–27.
54.
SmidfeltKNordanstigJDavidssonA, et al.Misdiagnosis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms is common and is associated with increased mortality. J Vasc Surg2021; 73: 476–483.e3.
55.
ThomasACKnapmanPAKriklerDM, et al.Community study of the causes of ‘natural’ sudden death. Br Med J1988; 297: 1453–1456.
MarkarSRVidal-DiezAPatelK, et al.Comparison of surgical intervention and mortality for seven surgical emergencies in england and the United States. Ann Surg2019; 270: 806–812.
58.
TyrovolasSTyrovolaDGiné-VázquezI, et al.Global, regional, and national burden of aortic aneurysm, 1990–2017: a systematic analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Eur J Prev Cardiol2022; 29: 1220–1232.
59.
SchanzerAMessinaL. Two decades of endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: enormous progress with serious lessons learned. J Am Heart Assoc2012; 1: e000075. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.111.000075.
60.
ChenJCHildebrandHDSalvianAJ, et al.Progress in abdominal aortic aneurysm surgery: four decades of experience at a teaching center. Cardiovasc Surg1997; 5: 150–156.
61.
AbdulameerHAl TaiiHAl-KindiSG, et al.Epidemiology of fatal ruptured aortic aneurysms in the United States (1999-2016). J Vasc Surg2019; 69: 378–384.
62.
Global Burden of Disease Collaborative Network. Global Burden of Disease Study 2019 (GBD 2019) Results. 2020. https://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-2019
63.
Al-BalahAGoodallRSalciccioliJD, et al.Mortality from abdominal aortic aneurysm: trends in European Union 15+ countries from 1990 to 2017. Br J Surg2020; 107: 1459–1467.
64.
KarthikesalingamAVidal-DiezAHoltPJ, et al.Thresholds for abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in england and the United States. N Engl J Med2016; 375: 2051–2059.
65.
Dias-NetoMCastro-FerreiraRManiK, et al.Nationwide analysis of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm in Portugal (2000–2015). Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2020; 60: 27–35.
DanseyKDVarkevisserRRBSwerdlowNJ, et al.Epidemiology of endovascular and open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysms in the United States from 2004 to 2015 and implications for screening. J Vasc Surg2021; 74: 414–424.
68.
LouzadaACSda SilvaMFAPortugalMFC, et al.Epidemiology of abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in Brazil from 2008 to 2019 and comprehensive review of nationwide statistics across the world. World J Surg2022; 46: 1485–1492.
69.
AntoniouGAAntoniouSATorellaF. Editor’s choice - endovascular vs. Open repair for abdominal aortic aneurysm: systematic review and meta-analysis of updated peri-operative and long term data of randomised controlled trials. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2020; 59: 385–397.
70.
LiBKhanSSalataK, et al.A systematic review and meta-analysis of the long-term outcomes of endovascular versus open repair of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg2019; 70: 954–969.
71.
DaiXGakidouELopezAD. Evolution of the global smoking epidemic over the past half century: strengthening the evidence base for policy action. Tob Control2022; 31: 129–137.
72.
TilsonMD. Autoimmunity in the abdominal aortic aneurysm and its association with smoking. Aorta2017; 5: 159–167.
73.
HalushkaMKAngeliniABartoloniG, et al.Consensus statement on surgical pathology of the aorta from the Society for Cardiovascular Pathology and the Association for European Cardiovascular Pathology: II. Noninflammatory degenerative diseases — nomenclature and diagnostic criteria. Cardiovasc Pathol2016; 25: 247–257.
74.
StoneJRBrunevalPAngeliniA, et al.Consensus statement on surgical pathology of the aorta from the society for cardiovascular pathology and the association for European cardiovascular pathology: I. Inflammatory diseases. Cardiovasc Pathol2015; 24: 267–278.
75.
BruijnLEvan Stroe GómezCGCurciJA, et al.A histopathological classification scheme for abdominal aortic aneurysm disease. JVS Vasc Sci2021; 2: 260–273.
76.
SinghKBønaaKHJacobsenBK, et al.Prevalence of and risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysms in a population-based study : the tromsø study. Am J Epidemiol2001; 154: 236–244.
77.
WanhainenA. How to define an abdominal aortic aneurysm - influence on epidemiology and clinical practice. Scand J Surg2008; 97: 105–109.
78.
SonessonBLänneTHansenF, et al.Infrarenal aortic diameter in the healthy person. Eur J Vasc Surg1994; 8: 89–95.
79.
SonessonBLänneTVernerssonE, et al.Sex difference in the mechanical properties of the abdominal aorta in human beings. J Vasc Surg1994; 20: 959–969.
80.
McGregorJCPollockJGAntonHC. The value of ultrasonography in the diagnosis of abdominal aortic aneurysm. Scott Med J1975; 20: 133–137.
81.
SterpettiAVSchultzRDFeldhausRJ, et al.Factors influencing enlargement rate of small abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Surg Res1987; 43: 211–219.
82.
CollinJAraujoLWaltonJ, et al.Oxford screening programme for abdominal aortic aneurysm in men aged 65 to 74 years. Lancet1988; 2: 613–615.
83.
AlcornHGWolfsonSKSutton-TyrrellK, et al.Risk factors for abdominal aortic aneurysms in older adults enrolled in the cardiovascular health study. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol1996; 16: 963–970.
84.
WanhainenAThemudoRAhlströmH, et al.Thoracic and abdominal aortic dimension in 70-year-old men and women – a population-based whole-body magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) study. J Vasc Surg2008; 47: 504–512.
85.
JonesGTSandifordPHillGB, et al.Correcting for body surface area identifies the true prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm in screened women. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2019; 57: 221–228.
86.
SteinbergISteinHL. Arteriosclerotic abdominal aneurysms. Report of 200 consecutive cases diagnosed by intravenous aortography. J Am Med Assoc1966; 195: 1025–1029.
87.
PearceWHSlaughterMSLeMaireS, et al.Aortic diameter as a function of age, gender, and body surface area. Surgery1993; 114: 691–697.
88.
LederleFAJohnsonGRWilsonSE, et al.Prevalence and associations of abdominal aortic aneurysm detected through screening. Aneurysm detection and management (ADAM) veterans affairs cooperative study group. Ann Intern Med1997; 126: 441–449.
89.
WanhainenABjörckMBomanK, et al.Influence of diagnostic criteria on the prevalence of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg2001; 34: 229–235.
90.
DaviesRRGalloACoadyMA, et al.Novel measurement of relative aortic size predicts rupture of thoracic aortic aneurysms. Ann Thorac Surg2006; 81: 169–177.
91.
LoRCLuBFokkemaMTM, et al.Relative importance of aneurysm diameter and body size for predicting abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture in men and women. J Vasc Surg2014; 59: 1209–1216.
92.
NyrønningLÅSkoogPVidemV, et al.Is the aortic size index relevant as a predictor of abdominal aortic aneurysm? A population-based prospective study: the Tromsø study. Scand Cardiovasc J2020; 54: 130–137.
93.
MoherDColeCWHillGB. Epidemiology of abdominal aortic aneurysm: the effect of differing definitions. Eur J Vasc Surg1992; 6: 647–650.
94.
KurversHVeithFJLipsitzEC, et al.Discontinuous, staccato growth of abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Am Coll Surg2004; 199: 709–715.
95.
OlsonSLWijesinhaMAPanthoferAM, et al.Evaluating growth patterns of abdominal aortic aneurysm diameter with serial computed tomography surveillance. JAMA Surg2021; 156: 363–370.
96.
LiddingtonMIHeatherBP. The relationship between aortic diameter and body habitus. Eur J Vasc Surg1992; 6: 89–92.
97.
LederleFAJohnsonGRWilsonSE, et al.Relationship of age, gender, race, and body size to infrarenal aortic diameter. The aneurysm detection and management (ADAM) veterans affairs cooperative study investigators. J Vasc Surg1997; 26: 595–601.
98.
SummerhillVISukhorukovVNEidAH, et al.Pathophysiological aspects of the development of abdominal aortic aneurysm with a special focus on mitochondrial dysfunction and genetic associations. Biomol Concepts2021; 12: 55–67.
99.
GrundmannRT. Etiology, pathogenesis and pathophysiology of aortic aneurysms and aneurysm rupture. InTech.
100.
HicksonSSButlinMGravesM, et al.The relationship of age with regional aortic stiffness and diameter. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging2010; 3: 1247–1255.
101.
MitchellGFConlinPRDunlapME, et al.Aortic diameter, wall stiffness, and wave reflection in systolic hypertension. Hypertension2008; 51: 105–111.
102.
RiverosFMartufiGGasserTC, et al.On the impact of intraluminal thrombus mechanical behavior in AAA passive mechanics. Ann Biomed Eng2015; 43: 2253–2264.
103.
KooleDZandvoortHJASchoneveldA, et al.Intraluminal abdominal aortic aneurysm thrombus is associated with disruption of wall integrity. J Vasc Surg2013; 57: 77–83.
ThanigaimaniSGolledgeJ. Role of adipokines and perivascular adipose tissue in abdominal aortic aneurysm: a systematic review and meta-analysis of animal and human observational studies. Front Endocrinol2021; 12: 618434. DOI: 10.3389/FENDO.2021.618434.
106.
SonessonBHansenFStaleH, et al.Compliance and diameter in the human abdominal aorta—the influence of age and sex. Eur J Vasc Surg1993; 7: 690–697.
107.
IndrakusumaRJalalzadehHPlankenRN, et al.Biomechanical imaging markers as predictors of abdominal aortic aneurysm growth or rupture: a systematic review. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2016; 52: 475–486.
108.
TharmaseelanHFroelichMFNörenbergD, et al.Influence of local aortic calcification on periaortic adipose tissue radiomics texture features—a primary analysis on PCCT. Int J Cardiovasc Imaging2022; 38: 2459–2467.
109.
JorgensenSMKorinekMJVercnockeAJ, et al.Arterial wall perfusion measured with photon counting spectral x-ray CT. Proc SPIE Int Soc Opt Eng9967: 99670B.
110.
RajendranKLengSJorgensenSM, et al.Measuring arterial wall perfusion using photon-counting computed tomography (CT): improving CT number accuracy of artery wall using image deconvolution. J Med Imaging2017; 4: 044006.
111.
JarvisKSoulatGScottM, et al.Investigation of aortic wall thickness, stiffness and flow reversal in patients with cryptogenic stroke: a 4D flow MRI study. J Magn Reson Imaging2021; 53: 942–952.
112.
FerdianEDubowitzDJMaugerCA, et al.WSSNet: aortic wall shear stress estimation using deep learning on 4D flow MRI. Front Cardiovasc Med2021; 8: 769927. DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.769927.
113.
BotnarRMWiethoffAJEbersbergerU, et al.In vivo assessment of aortic aneurysm wall integrity using elastin-specific molecular magnetic resonance imaging. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging2014; 7: 679–689.
114.
RastogiVStefensSJMHouwaartJ, et al.Molecular imaging of aortic aneurysm and its translational power for clinical risk assessment. Front Med2022; 9: 814123.
115.
MakowskiMRPreisselAvon BaryC, et al.Three-dimensional imaging of the aortic vessel wall using an elastin-specific magnetic resonance contrast agent. Invest Radiol2012; 47: 438–444.
116.
RoesSDWestenbergJJMDoornbosJ, et al.Aortic vessel wall magnetic resonance imaging at 3.0 Tesla: a reproducibility study of respiratory navigator gated free-breathing 3D black blood magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med2009; 61: 35–44.
117.
HedgireSKrebillCWojtkiewiczGR, et al.Ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticle uptake as noninvasive marker of aortic wall inflammation on MRI: proof of concept study. Br J Radiol2018; 91: 20180461.
118.
NahrendorfMKeliherEMarinelliB, et al.Detection of macrophages in aortic aneurysms by nanoparticle positron emission tomography-computed tomography. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol2011; 31: 750–757.
119.
YinLZhangKSunY, et al.Nanoparticle-assisted diagnosis and treatment for abdominal aortic aneurysm. Front Med2021; 8: 665846.
120.
ShethRAMaricevichMMahmoodU. In vivo optical molecular imaging of matrix metalloproteinase activity in abdominal aortic aneurysms correlates with treatment effects on growth rate. Atherosclerosis2010; 212: 181–187.
121.
KpodonuJRamaiahVGDiethrichEB. Intravascular ultrasound imaging as applied to the aorta: a new tool for the cardiovascular surgeon. Ann Thorac Surg2008; 86: 1391–1398.
122.
Van DisseldorpEMJVan DronkelaarJJPluimJPW, et al.Ultrasound based wall stress analysis of abdominal aortic aneurysms using multiperspective imaging. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg2020; 59: 81–91.
123.
BoydAJKuhnDCSLozowyRJ, et al.Low wall shear stress predominates at sites of abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture. J Vasc Surg2016; 63: 1613–1619. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2015.01.040.
124.
StergiouYKanarisAMouzaA, et al.Fluid-structure interaction in abdominal aortic aneurysms: effect of haematocrit. Fluids2019; 4: 11.
125.
FonkenJHCMaasEJNievergeldAHM, et al.Ultrasound-based fluid-structure interaction modeling of abdominal aortic aneurysms incorporating pre-stress. Front Physiol2021; 12: 717593.
126.
LinSHanXBiY, et al.Fluid-structure interaction in abdominal aortic aneurysm: effect of modeling techniques. BioMed Res Int2017; 2017: 7023078.
127.
SalmanHERamazanliBYavuzMM, et al.Biomechanical investigation of disturbed hemodynamics-induced tissue degeneration in abdominal aortic aneurysms using computational and experimental techniques. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2019; 7: 111.
128.
ZhouZTengBZhaoY, et al.Comparison of small symptomatic and asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysms based on computational fluid dynamics analysis. Medicine (Baltim)2021; 100: e27306.
129.
RaffortJAdamCCarrierM, et al.Artificial intelligence in abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg2020; 72: 321–333.
130.
SabaLBiswasMKuppiliV, et al.The present and future of deep learning in radiology. Eur J Radiol2019; 114: 14–24.
131.
IkedaNDeyNSharmaA, et al.Automated segmental-IMT measurement in thin/thick plaque with bulb presence in carotid ultrasound from multiple scanners: stroke risk assessment. Comput Methods Programs Biomed2017; 141: 73–81.
132.
SabaLArakiTKumarPK, et al.Carotid inter-adventitial diameter is more strongly related to plaque score than lumen diameter: an automated tool for stroke analysis. J Clin Ultrasound2016; 44: 210–220.
133.
RengarajanBPatnaikSSFinolEA. A predictive analysis of wall stress in abdominal aortic aneurysms using a neural network model. J Biomech Eng; 2021; 143: 121004. DOI: 10.1115/1.4051905.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
