Background: The acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic requires a redefinition of healthcare system to increase the number of available intensive care units for COVID-19 patients. This leads to the postponement of elective surgeries including the treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA). The probabilistic rupture risk index (PRRI) recently showed its advantage over the diameter criterion in AAA rupture risk assessment. Its major improvement is in increased specificity and yet has the same sensitivity as the maximal diameter criterion. The objective of this study was to test the clinical applicability of the PRRI method in a quasi-prospective patient cohort study. Methods: Nineteen patients (fourteen males, five females) with intact AAA who were postponed due to COVID-19 pandemic were included in this study. The PRRI was calculated at the baseline via finite element method models. If a case was diagnosed as high risk (PRRI > 3%), the patient was offered priority in AAA intervention. Cases were followed until 10 September 2021 and a number of false positive and false negative cases were recorded. Results: Each case was assessed within 3 days. Priority in intervention was offered to two patients with high PRRI. There were four false positive cases and no false negative cases classified by PRRI. In three cases, the follow-up was very short to reach any conclusion. Conclusions: Integrating PRRI into clinical workflow is possible. Longitudinal validation of PRRI did not fail and may significantly decrease the false positive rate in AAA treatment.

• Keywords
• COVID-19, abdominal aortic aneurysm, biomechanics, predictability, rupture risk,
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH

A rupture risk assessment is critical to the clinical treatment of abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) patients. The biomechanical AAA rupture risk assessment quantitatively integrates many known AAA rupture risk factors but the variability of risk predictions due to model input uncertainties remains a challenging limitation. This study derives a probabilistic rupture risk index (PRRI). Specifically, the uncertainties in AAA wall thickness and wall strength were considered, and wall stress was predicted with a state-of-the-art deterministic biomechanical model. The discriminative power of PRRI was tested in a diameter-matched cohort of ruptured (n = 7) and intact (n = 7) AAAs and compared to alternative risk assessment methods. Computed PRRI at 1.5 mean arterial pressure was significantly (p = 0.041) higher in ruptured AAAs (20.21(s.d. 14.15%)) than in intact AAAs (3.71(s.d. 5.77)%). PRRI showed a high sensitivity and specificity (discriminative power of 0.837) to discriminate between ruptured and intact AAA cases. The underlying statistical representation of stochastic data of wall thickness, wall strength and peak wall stress had only negligible effects on PRRI computations. Uncertainties in AAA wall stress predictions, the wide range of reported wall strength and the stochastic nature of failure motivate a probabilistic rupture risk assessment. Advanced AAA biomechanical modelling paired with a probabilistic rupture index definition as known from engineering risk assessment seems to be superior to a purely deterministic approach.

• Keywords
• abdominal aortic aneurysm, failure, model finite element, uncertainty, wall stress,
• MeSH
• Aortic Aneurysm, Abdominal * pathology   physiopathology   MeSH
• Biomechanical Phenomena MeSH
• Risk Assessment MeSH
• Humans MeSH
• Models, Cardiovascular * MeSH
• Aortic Rupture * pathology   physiopathology   MeSH
• Check Tag
• Humans MeSH
• Male MeSH
• Female MeSH
• Publication type
• Journal Article MeSH
• Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH