Literature DB >> 15047374

Finite element modeling and intravascular ultrasound elastography of vulnerable plaques: parameter variation.

Radj A Baldewsing1, Chris L de Korte, Johannes A Schaar, Frits Mastik, Antonius F W van der Steen.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND GOAL: More than 60% of all myocardial infarction is caused by rupture of a vulnerable plaque. A vulnerable plaque can be described as a large, soft lipid pool covered by a thin fibrous cap. Plaque material composition, geometry, and inflammation caused by infiltration of macrophages are considered as major determinants for plaque rupture. For diagnostic purposes, these determinants may be obtained from elastograms (i.e. radial strain images), which are derived from intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) measurements. IVUS elastograms, however, cannot be interpreted directly as tissue component images, because radial strain depends upon plaque geometry, plaque material properties, and used catheter position. To understand and quantify the influence of these parameters upon measured IVUS elastograms, they were varied in a finite element model (FEM) that simulates IVUS elastograms of vulnerable plaques.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: IVUS elastography measurements were performed on a vessel mimicking phantom, with a soft plaque embedded in a hard wall, and an atherosclerotic human coronary artery containing a vulnerable plaque. Next, FEMs were created to simulate IVUS elastograms of the same objects. In these FEMs the following parameters were varied: Young's modulus (E), Poisson's ratio (nu) in range 0.49-0.4999, catheter position (translation of 0.8 mm), and cap thickness (t) in range 50-350 microm. Hereby the resulting peak radial strain (PRS) was determined and visualized.
RESULTS: Measured static E for phantom was 4.2 kPa for plaque and 16.8 kPa for wall. Variation of E-wall in range 8.4-33.2 kPa and/or E-plaque in range 2.1-8.4 kPa using the phantom FEM, gave a PRS variation of 1.6%, i.e. from 1.7% up to almost 3.3%; for variation in nu this was only 0.07%, i.e. from 2.37% up to 2.44%. Variation of E-lipid in range 6.25-400 kPa and E-cap in range 700-2300 kPa using the artery FEM, gave a PRS variation of 3.1%, i.e. from 0.6% up to 3.7%. The PRS was higher for lower E-lipid and E-cap; it was located at a shoulder of the lipid pool. Variation of nu gave only a variation of 0.17%. Variation of t and E-cap resulted in a PRS variation of 1.4%, i.e. from 0.3% up to 1.7%; thinner and weaker caps gave higher PRS. Catheter position variation changed radial strain value.
CONCLUSIONS: Measured IVUS elastograms of vulnerable plaques depend highly upon the Young's modulus of lipid and cap, but not upon the Poisson's ratio. Different catheter positions result in different IVUS elastograms, but the diagnostically important high strain regions at the lipid shoulders are often still detectable. PRS increases when cap weakens or cap thickness decreases.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15047374     DOI: 10.1016/j.ultras.2003.11.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasonics        ISSN: 0041-624X            Impact factor:   2.890


  11 in total

1.  Visualizing the stress distribution within vascular tissues using intravascular ultrasound elastography: a preliminary investigation.

Authors:  Michael S Richards; Renato Perucchio; Marvin M Doyley
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2015-03-31       Impact factor: 2.998

2.  Anthropomorphic breast phantoms for testing elastography systems.

Authors:  Ernest L Madsen; Maritza A Hobson; Gary R Frank; Hairong Shi; Jingfeng Jiang; Timothy J Hall; Tomy Varghese; Marvin M Doyley; John B Weaver
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2006-06       Impact factor: 2.998

3.  The effect of intracranial stent implantation on the curvature of the cerebrovasculature.

Authors:  R M King; J-Y Chueh; I M J van der Bom; C F Silva; S L Carniato; G Spilberg; A K Wakhloo; M J Gounis
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-04-26       Impact factor: 3.825

4.  Comment on the publication "Three-dimensional ultrasound, biomicroscopy environmental and conventional scanning electron microscopy investigations of the human zonula ciliaris for numerical modelling of accommodation" by O. Stachs et al.

Authors:  Ronald A Schachar; Ali Abolmaali; Farhad Kamangar
Journal:  Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-03-08       Impact factor: 3.117

5.  In vivo IVUS-based 3-D fluid-structure interaction models with cyclic bending and anisotropic vessel properties for human atherosclerotic coronary plaque mechanical analysis.

Authors:  Chun Yang; Richard G Bach; Jie Zheng; Issam Ei Naqa; Pamela K Woodard; Zhongzhao Teng; Kristen Billiar; Dalin Tang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2009-06-26       Impact factor: 4.538

6.  Insights into the age-related decline in the amplitude of accommodation of the human lens using a non-linear finite-element model.

Authors:  R A Schachar; A Abolmaali; T Le
Journal:  Br J Ophthalmol       Date:  2006-07-19       Impact factor: 4.638

7.  Non-rigid image registration based strain estimator for intravascular ultrasound elastography.

Authors:  Michael S Richards; Marvin M Doyley
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2012-12-15       Impact factor: 2.998

8.  Effects of intima stiffness and plaque morphology on peak cap stress.

Authors:  Ali C Akyildiz; Lambert Speelman; Harald van Brummelen; Miguel A Gutiérrez; Renu Virmani; Aad van der Lugt; Anton Fw van der Steen; Jolanda J Wentzel; Frank Jh Gijsen
Journal:  Biomed Eng Online       Date:  2011-04-08       Impact factor: 2.819

9.  A Pointwise Method for Identifying Biomechanical Heterogeneity of the Human Gallbladder.

Authors:  Wenguang Li; Nigel C Bird; Xiaoyu Luo
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2017-03-31       Impact factor: 4.566

10.  Effects of Loading and Boundary Conditions on the Performance of Ultrasound Compressional Viscoelastography: A Computational Simulation Study to Guide Experimental Design.

Authors:  Che-Yu Lin; Ke-Vin Chang
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-16       Impact factor: 3.623

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.