From structural repair to biomechanical compatibility: Aortic stiffness after open and endovascular aortic repair.
8 affiliations
- 1Charing Cross Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
- 2Queen Elizabeth Hospital, University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham, UK.
- 3Department of General Surgery, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, UK.
- 4School of Medicine, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.
- 5Hull York Medical School, University of York, York, UK.
- 6Institute of Cardiac and Aortic Disorders, SRM Institutes for Medical Science (SIMS Hospital), Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
- 7Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK.
- 8Neurovascular Research Laboratory, Faculty of Life Sciences and Education, University of South Wales, Pontypridd, UK.
Abstract
Evaluation of aortic repair has traditionally prioritised perioperative safety, exclusion of the diseased segment and durability. As endovascular treatment expands to younger patients, attention is turning towards the biomechanical compatibility of prosthetic grafts with the native aorta. Native aortic compliance supports Windkessel function, whereas grafts create a compliance transition that may accelerate pulse-wave transmission, alter wave reflection and increase left-ventricular load. This narrative review distinguishes established evidence from emerging concepts after open surgical repair, endovascular aneurysm repair and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Carotid-femoral pulse-wave velocity (cfPWV) is the accepted reference non-invasive measure of regional aortic stiffness; cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)-derived segmental pulse-wave velocity and distensibility provide complementary information. Brachial-ankle pulse-wave velocity, the cardio-ankle vascular index, and augmentation index assess different territories or haemodynamic properties and are not interchangeable with cfPWV. Left-ventricular strain and mass are downstream cardiac outcomes. Clinical evidence generally reports increases in measured arterial-stiffness indices after endovascular repair, whereas findings after open repair are heterogeneous. Treatment length, landing-zone location, oversizing, anatomy and baseline vascular phenotype may be as important as graft fabric or stent-frame category. Conflicting comparisons of polyester and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene arise from small, non-randomised studies using non-equivalent endpoints and do not support a reliable ranking of commercial devices. Emerging 4D-flow CMR, simulation and compliant graft materials illustrate a shift from structural exclusion alone towards compliance-aware repair, but evidence of improved outcomes remains insufficient. Future studies should use standardised longitudinal stiffness, blood-pressure and cardiac assessments and relate biomechanical changes to hypertension, ventricular remodelling and cardiovascular outcomes.
Related
- A snare-assisted pull-up technique for side-branch component delivery during thoracic endovascular aortic repair for distal aortic arch aneurysm using Gore Thoracic Branch Endoprosthesis
- “Pave and Cover” strategy for Rotarex-assisted endovascular repair of thrombosed popliteal artery aneurysm to mitigate distal embolization
- The association of rural residence with aneurysm presentation and loss to follow-up after endovascular aneurysm repair in the Vascular Quality Initiative
- Fenestrated-branched endovascular repair of a complex abdominal aortic aneurysm in a patient with a pelvic kidney and left ventricular assist device
- Early-term and midterm outcomes of endovascular completion of high-risk subacute and early chronic residual dissection after type A repair
BibTeX
@article{moothathamby2026from,
title = {{From structural repair to biomechanical compatibility: Aortic stiffness after open and endovascular aortic repair.}},
author = {Thurkga Moothathamby and Matti Jubouri and Fatima Kayali and Sakshi Roy and Subham Roy and Idhrees Mohammed and Ian M Williams and Damian M Bailey and Mohamad Bashir},
journal = {Experimental physiology},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1113/ep092443},
url = {https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42932223},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - From structural repair to biomechanical compatibility: Aortic stiffness after open and endovascular aortic repair.
AU - Thurkga Moothathamby
AU - Matti Jubouri
AU - Fatima Kayali
AU - Sakshi Roy
AU - Subham Roy
AU - Idhrees Mohammed
AU - Ian M Williams
AU - Damian M Bailey
AU - Mohamad Bashir
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/26
JO - Experimental physiology
DO - 10.1113/ep092443
UR - https://europepmc.org/article/MED/42932223
AB - Evaluation of aortic repair has traditionally prioritised perioperative safety, exclusion of the diseased segment and durability. As endovascular treatment expands to younger patients, attention is turning towards the biomechanical compatibility of prosthetic grafts with the native aorta. Native aortic compliance supports Windkessel function, whereas grafts create a compliance transition that may accelerate pulse-wave transmission, alter wave reflection and increase left-ventricular load. This narrative review distinguishes established evidence from emerging concepts after open surgical repair, endovascular aneurysm repair and thoracic endovascular aortic repair. Carotid-femoral pulse-wave velocity (cfPWV) is the accepted reference non-invasive measure of regional aortic stiffness; cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)-derived segmental pulse-wave velocity and distensibility provide complementary information. Brachial-ankle pulse-wave velocity, the cardio-ankle vascular index, and augmentation index assess different territories or haemodynamic properties and are not interchangeable with cfPWV. Left-ventricular strain and mass are downstream cardiac outcomes. Clinical evidence generally reports increases in measured arterial-stiffness indices after endovascular repair, whereas findings after open repair are heterogeneous. Treatment length, landing-zone location, oversizing, anatomy and baseline vascular phenotype may be as important as graft fabric or stent-frame category. Conflicting comparisons of polyester and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene arise from small, non-randomised studies using non-equivalent endpoints and do not support a reliable ranking of commercial devices. Emerging 4D-flow CMR, simulation and compliant graft materials illustrate a shift from structural exclusion alone towards compliance-aware repair, but evidence of improved outcomes remains insufficient. Future studies should use standardised longitudinal stiffness, blood-pressure and cardiac assessments and relate biomechanical changes to hypertension, ventricular remodelling and cardiovascular outcomes.
SN - 0958-0670
SN - 1469-445X
ER -