Abstract
Adjusting hemodynamics via flow diverter (FD) implantation is emerging as a novel method of treating cerebral aneurysms. However, most previous FD-related hemodynamic studies were based on virtual FD deployment, which may produce different hemodynamic outcomes than realistic (in vivo) FD deployment. We compared hemodynamics between virtual FD and realistic FD deployments in rabbit aneurysm models using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. FDs were implanted for aneurysms in 14 rabbits. Vascular models based on rabbit-specific angiograms were reconstructed for CFD studies. Real FD configurations were reconstructed based on micro-CT scans after sacrifice, while virtual FD configurations were constructed with SolidWorks software. Hemodynamic parameters before and after FD deployment were analyzed. According to the metal coverage (MC) of implanted FDs calculated based on micro-CT reconstruction, 14 rabbits were divided into two groups (A, MC >35%; B, MC <35%). Normalized mean wall shear stress (WSS), relative residence time (RRT), inflow velocity, and inflow volume in Group A were significantly different (P<0.05) from virtual FD deployment, but pressure was not (P>0.05). The normalized mean WSS in Group A after realistic FD implantation was significantly lower than that of Group B. All parameters in Group B exhibited no significant difference between realistic and virtual FDs. This study confirmed MC-correlated differences in hemodynamic parameters between realistic and virtual FD deployment.
Highlights
Hemodynamic modification is one objective of aneurysm treatment, as hemodynamic factors are commonly believed to play an important role in the pathogenesis, progress, and rupture of cerebral aneurysms. [1,2] The application of an endovascular stent allows many complex aneurysms to be treated with intervention therapy
[3] The purpose of a stent placed in the parent artery is to protect the parent artery from occlusion, and to act as flow diversion. [4,5,6,7] This hemodynamic effect was further confirmed in some clinical studies, which showed that stent-assisted embolization had a higher long-term healing rate than coil embolization
[12] an increasingly number of flow diverter (FD) have been applied in intracranial aneurysms as a novel therapy, the variability of its clinical outcomes emphasizes a need to investigate the hemodynamic effects of FDs on patientspecific aneurysms
Summary
Hemodynamic modification is one objective of aneurysm treatment, as hemodynamic factors are commonly believed to play an important role in the pathogenesis, progress, and rupture of cerebral aneurysms. [1,2] The application of an endovascular stent allows many complex aneurysms to be treated with intervention therapy. [3] The purpose of a stent placed in the parent artery is to protect the parent artery from occlusion, and to act as flow diversion. [4,5,6,7] This hemodynamic effect was further confirmed in some clinical studies, which showed that stent-assisted embolization had a higher long-term healing rate than coil embolization. [8] The use of flow diverters (FDs) is an emerging paradigm for treating traditionally difficult cerebral aneurysms, such as wide-necked, large or fusiform aneurysms, [9,10,11] by using a fine mesh to divert flow away from the aneurysm sac. [8] The use of flow diverters (FDs) is an emerging paradigm for treating traditionally difficult cerebral aneurysms, such as wide-necked, large or fusiform aneurysms, [9,10,11] by using a fine mesh to divert flow away from the aneurysm sac These stent-like devices are designed to divert blood flow along the normal anatomical course of the vessel and away from the aneurysm dome. [13] Previous studies proved that the hemodynamics of aneurysms could be observably affected by the porosity and mesh hole shape of FDs. Whether the difference in clinical outcomes is related to the variable configuration of the deployed FD remains to be confirmed, which has caused uncertainty regarding the accuracy of FD treatment. The variable configurations may be the key points causing the different outcomes obtained when analyzing the stent-related hemodynamic parameters
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
