PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to review past studies that have used engineering analysis to examine cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics in cranial and spinal subarachnoid spaces in both healthy humans and those affected by type I Chiari malformation. METHODS: A PubMed search of literature pertaining to cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics was performed with a particular focus on those that utilized methods such as computational fluid dynamics or experimental flow modeling. DISCUSSION: From the engineer's perspective, type I Chiari malformation is an abnormal geometry of the cerebellum that causes increased resistance to cerebrospinal fluid flow between the intracranial and spinal subarachnoid space. As such, understanding the hydrodynamics of cerebrospinal fluid in the craniospinal subarachnoid space has long been thought to be important in the diagnosis and management of type I Chiari malformation. Hydrodynamic quantification of cerebrospinal fluid motion in the subarachnoid space may better reflect the pathophysiology of the disorder and serve as a prognostic indicator in conjunction with geometric magnetic resonance measurements that are currently used clinically. This review discusses the results of studies that have sought to quantify the hydrodynamics of cerebrospinal fluid motion using computational and experimental modeling and critiques the methods by which the results were obtained. CONCLUSION: Researchers have found differences in cerebrospinal fluid velocities and pressures in type I Chiari malformation patients compared to healthy subjects. However, further research is necessary to determine the causal relationship between changes to hydrodynamic parameters such as cerebrospinal fluid velocity, pressure, resistance to flow, and craniospinal compliance and clinical aspects such as neurological symptoms, radiological evidence of severity, and surgical success.
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to review past studies that have used engineering analysis to examine cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics in cranial and spinal subarachnoid spaces in both healthy humans and those affected by type I Chiari malformation. METHODS: A PubMed search of literature pertaining to cerebrospinal fluid hydrodynamics was performed with a particular focus on those that utilized methods such as computational fluid dynamics or experimental flow modeling. DISCUSSION: From the engineer's perspective, type I Chiari malformation is an abnormal geometry of the cerebellum that causes increased resistance to cerebrospinal fluid flow between the intracranial and spinal subarachnoid space. As such, understanding the hydrodynamics of cerebrospinal fluid in the craniospinal subarachnoid space has long been thought to be important in the diagnosis and management of type I Chiari malformation. Hydrodynamic quantification of cerebrospinal fluid motion in the subarachnoid space may better reflect the pathophysiology of the disorder and serve as a prognostic indicator in conjunction with geometric magnetic resonance measurements that are currently used clinically. This review discusses the results of studies that have sought to quantify the hydrodynamics of cerebrospinal fluid motion using computational and experimental modeling and critiques the methods by which the results were obtained. CONCLUSION: Researchers have found differences in cerebrospinal fluid velocities and pressures in type I Chiari malformationpatients compared to healthy subjects. However, further research is necessary to determine the causal relationship between changes to hydrodynamic parameters such as cerebrospinal fluid velocity, pressure, resistance to flow, and craniospinal compliance and clinical aspects such as neurological symptoms, radiological evidence of severity, and surgical success.
Authors: Braden J Lawrence; Mark Luciano; John Tew; Richard G Ellenbogen; John N Oshinski; Francis Loth; Amanda P Culley; Bryn A Martin Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2018-05-04 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Alexander C Bunck; Jan Robert Kroeger; Alena Juettner; Angela Brentrup; Barbara Fiedler; Gerard R Crelier; Bryn A Martin; Walter Heindel; David Maintz; Wolfram Schwindt; Thomas Niederstadt Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-05-09 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: Soroush Heidari Pahlavian; Alexander C Bunck; Francis Loth; R Shane Tubbs; Theresia Yiallourou; Jan Robert Kroeger; Walter Heindel; Bryn A Martin Journal: J Biomech Eng Date: 2015-02-20 Impact factor: 2.097
Authors: Alireza Radmanesh; Jacob K Greenberg; Arindam Chatterjee; Matthew D Smyth; David D Limbrick; Aseem Sharma Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2015-01-07 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Vidyadhar V Upasani; Pamela Deaver Ketwaroo; Judy A Estroff; Benjamin C Warf; John B Emans; Michael P Glotzbecker Journal: World J Orthop Date: 2016-07-18
Authors: Anna Losurdo; Serena Dittoni; Elisa Testani; Chiara Di Blasi; Emanuele Scarano; Paolo Mariotti; Giovanna Paternoster; Concezio Di Rocco; Luca Massimi; Giacomo Della Marca Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2013-04-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Nicholas Shaffer; Bryn A Martin; Brandon Rocque; Casey Madura; Oliver Wieben; Bermans J Iskandar; Stephen Dombrowski; Mark Luciano; John N Oshinski; Francis Loth Journal: J Biomech Eng Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 2.097
Authors: Bryn A Martin; Theresia I Yiallourou; Soroush Heidari Pahlavian; Suraj Thyagaraj; Alexander C Bunck; Francis Loth; Daniel B Sheffer; Jan Robert Kröger; Nikolaos Stergiopulos Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2015-10-07 Impact factor: 3.934