The objective of this study is to present a credibility assessment of finite element modelling of self-expanding nickel-titanium (Ni-Ti) stents through verification and validation (VV) activities, as set out in the ASME VV-40 standard. As part of the study, the role of calculation verification, model input sensitivity, and model validation is examined across three different application contexts (radial compression, stent deployment in a vessel, fatigue estimation). A commercially available self-expanding Ni-Ti stent was modelled, and calculation verification activities addressed the effects of mesh density, element integration and stable time increment on different quantities of interests, for each context of use considered. Sensitivity analysis of the geometrical and material input parameters and validation of deployment configuration with in vitro comparators were investigated. Results showed similar trends for global and local outputs across the contexts of use in response to the selection of discretization parameters, although with varying sensitivities. Mesh discretisation showed substantial variability for less than 4 × 4 element density across the strut cross-section in radial compression and deployment cases, while a finer grid was deemed necessary in fatigue estimation for reliable predictions of strain/stress. Element formulation also led to substantial variation depending on the chosen integration options. Furthermore, for explicit analyses, model results were highly sensitive to the chosen target time increment (e.g., mass scaling parameters), irrespective of whether quasistatic conditions were ensured (ratios of kinetic and internal energies below 5%). The higher variability was found for fatigue life simulation, with the estimation of fatigue safety factor varying up to an order of magnitude depending on the selection of discretization parameters. Model input sensitivity analysis highlighted that the predictions of outputs such as radial force and stresses showed relatively low sensitivity to Ni-Ti material parameters, which suggests that the calibration approaches used in the literature to date appear reasonable, but a higher sensitivity to stent geometry, namely strut thickness and width, was found. In contrast, the prediction of vessel diameter following deployment was least sensitive to numerical parameters, and its validation with in vitro comparators offered a simple and accurate (error ~ 1-2%) method when predicting diameter gain, and lumen area, provided that the material of the vessel is appropriately characterized and modelled.
Copyright: © 2023 Bernini et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.