Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-20T03:46:23.961Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Matrix Protein Structural Analysis of Brain Aneurysms by Polarizing Microscopy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 July 2020

Peter B. Canham
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, N6A 5C1
Helen M. Finlay
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Western Ontario London, Ontario, N6A 5C1
Jay D. Humphrey
Affiliation:
Biomedical Engineering Program, Texas A & M University, College Station, TX, 77843-3120.
Get access

Extract

The wall of saccular brain aneurysms, lesions that develop at the fork regions of human brain arteries, is a layered multidirectional fabric of fibrous collagen. The wall tissue has the mechanical features of high elastic stiffness and a low tensile strength compared to adjacent arteries. Arterial blood pressure within the sac of an aneurysm stresses the wall in all tangential directions; thus an area of mechanical weakness may be characterized by an area lacking fibre strength, or an area with inadequately aligned fibres.

The collagen fibres of the wall are birefringent, with many fibre types, similar to wound healing skin (types I, III, IV, V, VI) The known correlation between fibre birefringence and tissue strength for dermal wound healing3 provided the opportunity in this research to calculate strength maps to compare one lesion from another, and to make regional comparisons around a single lesion.

Type
Imaging of Vascular Disorders
Copyright
Copyright © Microscopy Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References:

1.Canham, P. B. at al., J. Microsc 183 (1996) 170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Canham, P. B. et al., Neurol. Res. 21 (1999) 618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Doillon, C. J. et al., Coll. Relat. Res. 5 (1985) 481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Kyriacou, S. K. and Humphrey, J. D.. J. Biomech. 29 (1996) 1015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.MacDonald, D. J. et al., Ann. Biomed. Eng. (Submitted)Google Scholar
6.Mimata, C. et al., Acta Neuropathol. 94 (1997) 197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7.Romanos, G. E. and Strub, J. R.. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 39 (1998) 462.3.0.CO;2-C>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
8.Scott, S. et al., Can J. Physiol. Pharmacol. 50 (1972) 328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
9.Wiebers, D. O.. Engl, N.. J. Med. 339 (1998) 1725.Google Scholar
10. Research supported by the Heart and Stroke Foundation Of Ontario grant to P. B. Canham, and NIH grant to Humphrey, J. D..Google Scholar