Literature DB >> 27696717

Non-Newtonian versus numerical rheology: Practical impact of shear-thinning on the prediction of stable and unstable flows in intracranial aneurysms.

M O Khan1,2, D A Steinman1, K Valen-Sendstad2.   

Abstract

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) shows promise for informing treatment planning and rupture risk assessment for intracranial aneurysms. Much attention has been paid to the impact on predicted hemodynamics of various modelling assumptions and uncertainties, including the need for modelling the non-Newtonian, shear-thinning rheology of blood, with equivocal results. Our study clarifies this issue by contextualizing the impact of rheology model against the recently demonstrated impact of CFD solution strategy on the prediction of aneurysm flow instabilities. Three aneurysm cases were considered, spanning a range of stable to unstable flows. Simulations were performed using a high-resolution/accuracy solution strategy with Newtonian and modified-Cross rheology models and compared against results from a so-called normal-resolution strategy. Time-averaged and instantaneous wall shear stress (WSS) distributions, as well as frequency content of flow instabilities and dome-averaged WSS metrics, were minimally affected by the rheology model, whereas numerical solution strategy had a demonstrably more marked impact when the rheology model was fixed. We show that point-wise normalization of non-Newtonian by Newtonian WSS values tended to artificially amplify small differences in WSS of questionable physiological relevance in already-low WSS regions, which might help to explain the disparity of opinions in the aneurysm CFD literature regarding the impact of non-Newtonian rheology. Toward the goal of more patient-specific aneurysm CFD, we conclude that attention seems better spent on solution strategy and other likely "first-order" effects (eg, lumen segmentation and choice of flow rates), as opposed to "second-order" effects such as rheology.
Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  CFD; aneurysm; non-Newtonian; rheology; transition

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27696717     DOI: 10.1002/cnm.2836

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng        ISSN: 2040-7939            Impact factor:   2.747


  12 in total

Review 1.  What does computational fluid dynamics tell us about intracranial aneurysms? A meta-analysis and critical review.

Authors:  Khalid M Saqr; Sherif Rashad; Simon Tupin; Kuniyasu Niizuma; Tamer Hassan; Teiji Tominaga; Makoto Ohta
Journal:  J Cereb Blood Flow Metab       Date:  2019-06-18       Impact factor: 6.200

2.  Better Than Nothing: A Rational Approach for Minimizing the Impact of Outflow Strategy on Cerebrovascular Simulations.

Authors:  C Chnafa; O Brina; V M Pereira; D A Steinman
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-12-21       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 3.  Disturbed flow's impact on cellular changes indicative of vascular aneurysm initiation, expansion, and rupture: A pathological and methodological review.

Authors:  Kevin Sunderland; Jingfeng Jiang; Feng Zhao
Journal:  J Cell Physiol       Date:  2021-09-06       Impact factor: 6.384

4.  Accounting for residence-time in blood rheology models: do we really need non-Newtonian blood flow modelling in large arteries?

Authors:  Amirhossein Arzani
Journal:  J R Soc Interface       Date:  2018-09-26       Impact factor: 4.118

5.  Associations between morphology and hemodynamics of intracranial aneurysms based on 4D flow and black-blood magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Miaoqi Zhang; Fei Peng; Yunduo Li; Le He; Aihua Liu; Rui Li
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2021-02

6.  Identification of intra-individual variation in intracranial arterial flow by MRI and the effect on computed hemodynamic descriptors.

Authors:  Xinke Liu; Evan Kao; Henrik Haraldsson; Megan Ballweber; Alastair Martin; Youxiang Li; Yuting Wang; David Saloner
Journal:  MAGMA       Date:  2021-04-11       Impact factor: 2.533

7.  Validation of Patient-Specific Cerebral Blood Flow Simulation Using Transcranial Doppler Measurements.

Authors:  Derek Groen; Robin A Richardson; Rachel Coy; Ulf D Schiller; Hoskote Chandrashekar; Fergus Robertson; Peter V Coveney
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 4.566

Review 8.  The Rheology of the Carotid Sinus: A Path Toward Bioinspired Intervention.

Authors:  Andrew Iskander; Coskun Bilgi; Rotem Naftalovich; Ilker Hacihaliloglu; Tolga Berkman; Daniel Naftalovich; Niema Pahlevan
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2021-06-10

Review 9.  Hemodynamics of Cerebral Aneurysms: Connecting Medical Imaging and Biomechanical Analysis.

Authors:  Vitaliy L Rayz; Aaron A Cohen-Gadol
Journal:  Annu Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 11.324

10.  Real-World Variability in the Prediction of Intracranial Aneurysm Wall Shear Stress: The 2015 International Aneurysm CFD Challenge.

Authors:  Kristian Valen-Sendstad; Aslak W Bergersen; Yuji Shimogonya; Leonid Goubergrits; Jan Bruening; Jordi Pallares; Salvatore Cito; Senol Piskin; Kerem Pekkan; Arjan J Geers; Ignacio Larrabide; Saikiran Rapaka; Viorel Mihalef; Wenyu Fu; Aike Qiao; Kartik Jain; Sabine Roller; Kent-Andre Mardal; Ramji Kamakoti; Thomas Spirka; Neil Ashton; Alistair Revell; Nicolas Aristokleous; J Graeme Houston; Masanori Tsuji; Fujimaro Ishida; Prahlad G Menon; Leonard D Browne; Stephen Broderick; Masaaki Shojima; Satoshi Koizumi; Michael Barbour; Alberto Aliseda; Hernán G Morales; Thierry Lefèvre; Simona Hodis; Yahia M Al-Smadi; Justin S Tran; Alison L Marsden; Sreeja Vaippummadhom; G Albert Einstein; Alistair G Brown; Kristian Debus; Kuniyasu Niizuma; Sherif Rashad; Shin-Ichiro Sugiyama; M Owais Khan; Adam R Updegrove; Shawn C Shadden; Bart M W Cornelissen; Charles B L M Majoie; Philipp Berg; Sylvia Saalfield; Kenichi Kono; David A Steinman
Journal:  Cardiovasc Eng Technol       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 2.495

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.