Juan R Cebral1, Mariano Vazquez2, Daniel M Sforza1, Guillaume Houzeaux2, Satoshi Tateshima3, Esteban Scrivano4, Carlos Bleise4, Pedro Lylyk4, Christopher M Putman5. 1. Center for Computational Fluid Dynamics, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia, USA. 2. CASE-High Performance Computational Mechanics, Barcelona Supercomputing Center, Barcelona, Spain. 3. Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, California, USA. 4. Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Instituto Clínico ENERI, Buenos Aires, Argentina. 5. Department of Interventional Neuroradiology, Inova Fairfax Hospital, Falls Church, Virginia, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is thought that aneurysms evolve as the result of progressive degradation of the wall in response to abnormal hemodynamics characterized by either high or low wall shear stress (WSS). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of these two different hemodynamic pathways in a series of cerebral aneurysms with known rupture sites. METHODS: Nine aneurysms in which the rupture site could be identified in three-dimensional images were analyzed. The WSS distribution was obtained from computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. Internal wall stresses were computed using structural wall models under hemodynamic loads determined by the CFD models. Wall properties (thickness and stiffness) were modulated with the WSS distribution (increased or decreased in regions of high or low WSS) to test possible wall degradation pathways. Rupture probability indices (RPI) were calculated to compare different wall models. RESULTS: Most rupture sites aligned with the intrasaccular flow stream and downstream of the primary impaction zone. The model that best explained the rupture site (produced higher RPI) in eight of the nine aneurysms (89%) had thinner and stiffer walls in regions of abnormally high WSS. The remaining case (11%) was best explained by a model with thinner and stiffer walls in regions of abnormally low WSS. CONCLUSIONS: Aneurysm rupture seems to be caused by localized degradation and weakening of the wall in response to abnormal hemodynamics. Image-based computational models assuming wall thinning and stiffening in regions of abnormally high WSS were able to explain most of the observed rupture sites. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
BACKGROUND: It is thought that aneurysms evolve as the result of progressive degradation of the wall in response to abnormal hemodynamics characterized by either high or low wall shear stress (WSS). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of these two different hemodynamic pathways in a series of cerebral aneurysms with known rupture sites. METHODS: Nine aneurysms in which the rupture site could be identified in three-dimensional images were analyzed. The WSS distribution was obtained from computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations. Internal wall stresses were computed using structural wall models under hemodynamic loads determined by the CFD models. Wall properties (thickness and stiffness) were modulated with the WSS distribution (increased or decreased in regions of high or low WSS) to test possible wall degradation pathways. Rupture probability indices (RPI) were calculated to compare different wall models. RESULTS: Most rupture sites aligned with the intrasaccular flow stream and downstream of the primary impaction zone. The model that best explained the rupture site (produced higher RPI) in eight of the nine aneurysms (89%) had thinner and stiffer walls in regions of abnormally high WSS. The remaining case (11%) was best explained by a model with thinner and stiffer walls in regions of abnormally low WSS. CONCLUSIONS:Aneurysm rupture seems to be caused by localized degradation and weakening of the wall in response to abnormal hemodynamics. Image-based computational models assuming wall thinning and stiffening in regions of abnormally high WSS were able to explain most of the observed rupture sites. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
Authors: Z Shi; B Hu; U J Schoepf; R H Savage; D M Dargis; C W Pan; X L Li; Q Q Ni; G M Lu; L J Zhang Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2020-03-12 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Jason Brett Hartman; Hiroko Watase; Jie Sun; Daniel S Hippe; Louis Kim; Michael Levitt; Laligam Sekhar; Niranjan Balu; Thomas Hatsukami; Chun Yuan; Mahmud Mossa-Basha Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2019-01-30 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: P Vakil; S A Ansari; C G Cantrell; C S Eddleman; F H Dehkordi; J Vranic; M C Hurley; H H Batjer; B R Bendok; T J Carroll Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2015-02-05 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S Voß; S Glaßer; T Hoffmann; O Beuing; S Weigand; K Jachau; B Preim; D Thévenin; G Janiga; P Berg Journal: Comput Math Methods Med Date: 2016-09-18 Impact factor: 2.238
Authors: Juan R Cebral; Fernando Mut; Piyusha Gade; Fangzhou Cheng; Yasutaka Tobe; Juhana Frosen; Anne M Robertson Journal: Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng Date: 2018-08-21 Impact factor: 2.747