RESUMO
The present study was conducted in order to establish a methodology based on the finite element method to simulate the contraction of the pelvic floor (PF) muscles. In the generated finite element model, a downward pressure of 90 cm H(2)O was applied, while actively contracting the PF muscles with different degrees of muscular activation (10, 50 and 100%). The finite element methodology of the active contraction behaviour proposed in this study is adequate to simulate PF muscle contraction with different degrees of muscular activation. In this case, in particular, for an activation of 100%, the numerical model was able to displace the pubovisceral muscle in a range of values very similar to the displacement found in the magnetic resonance imaging data. In the analysed case study, it would be possible to conclude that an intensity contraction of 50% would be necessary to produce enough stiffness to avoid possible urine loss.
Assuntos
Contração Muscular , Diafragma da Pelve/fisiopatologia , Adulto , Feminino , Análise de Elementos Finitos , Humanos , Imageamento por Ressonância Magnética , Modelos Biológicos , Diafragma da Pelve/anatomia & histologia , Incontinência Urinária por Estresse/fisiopatologiaRESUMO
The aim of this study was the comparison of the stiffness of different meshes under two types of mechanical tests. Five different mesh types were mechanically tested. The methods used consisted on uniaxial tension test (tensile stiffness) and tape ring tests, experimental continuous compression of the mesh loops (flexural stiffness). The most significant difference of tensile stiffness behaviour appears between Aris and TVTO. From the analysis of the experimental data, we divided the flexural stiffness, in two main groups. The first group includes Auto Suture and Aris meshes. The two meshes seem to have a similar flexural behaviour. The second group includes TVTO, Uretex and Avaulta. The difference between these two groups is clearly evident comparing TVTO and Aris. This study shows that there are significant differences on the mechanical properties between urogynecology meshes.