Evaluation of stent effect and thrombosis generation with different blood rheology on an intracranial aneurysm by the Lattice Boltzmann method

Abstract

Treatment of intracranial aneurysms with flow-diverting stents prevents rupture by reducing blood flow and creating thrombosis within the aneurysm. This paper aims to assess the hemodynamic effect of placing stents with different struts (0, 3, 5, 7 struts) on intracranial aneurysms and to propose a simple prediction model of thrombosis zone without any further computational cost. Lattice Boltzmann method with different rheological models (Newtonian, Carreau-Yasuda, KL) of blood are used to study the hemodynamic effect of flow-diverting stents in the aneurysm. Pulsatile flow boundary conditions were applied in the inlet of the artery. The average Reynolds number was resulting Re=111. The Lagrangian tracking of the particle was developed to assess the intra-aneurysmal blood stagnation. To predict the probable thrombose zone induced by flow-diverting stents, the shear rate threshold is utilized to determine the nodes of fluid to clot. The results show that the flow patterns into the aneurysmal sac develop a vortex, decreasing after stent placement until disappearance for the stent with seven struts (porosity 71.4%). Velocity, shear rate, shear stress, trajectory, path length, and occlusion rate are compared before and after stent placement. These parameters decrease inversely with the porosity of the stent. The three models yield a closes result of the (velocity, shear rate, occlusion rate). Tracking the fluid-particle trajectory shows that the length of the particle paths decreases with the number of struts causing fluid to slow down and increase, consequently, the residence time into the sac. The flow-diverting stents placement cause the reduction of dynamic flow within aneurysm. The reduction effect is almost the same below five struts (80% of porosity). The results show that, if our objective is restricted to estimating the hemodynamic effect, measured by (velocity, shear rate, occlusion rate), the differences between rheological behavior models are, practically, not significant, and the models can be used indifferently.