Literature DB >> 28057633

Compacting a Single Flow Diverter versus Overlapping Flow Diverters for Intracranial Aneurysms: A Computational Study.

R J Damiano1,2, V M Tutino2,3, N Paliwal1,2, D Ma1,2, J M Davies2,4, A H Siddiqui2,4, H Meng5,2,3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND
PURPOSE: Locally compacting the mesh of a flow diverter by a dynamic push-pull technique can accelerate intracranial aneurysm healing. We asked how this deployment strategy compares with overlapping 2 flow diverters for aneurysmal flow reduction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using a high-fidelity virtual stent placement method, we simulated 3 flow-diverter strategies (single noncompacted, 2 overlapped, and single compacted) in 3 aneurysms (fusiform, large saccular, and medium saccular). Computational fluid dynamics analysis provided posttreatment hemodynamic parameters, including time-averaged inflow rate, aneurysm-averaged velocity, wall shear stress, total absolute circulation, and turnover time. We examined the relationship between the achieved degree of compaction and aneurysm orifice area.
RESULTS: Flow-diverter compaction resulted in a compaction coverage of 57%, 47%, and 22% over the orifice of the fusiform, large, and medium saccular aneurysm, respectively. Compaction coverage increased linearly with orifice area. In the fusiform aneurysm, the single compacted flow diverter accomplished more aneurysmal flow reduction than the other 2 strategies, as indicated by all 5 hemodynamic parameters. In the 2 saccular aneurysms, the overlapped flow diverters achieved the most flow reduction, followed by the single compacted and the noncompacted flow diverter.
CONCLUSIONS: Compacting a single flow diverter can outperform overlapping 2 flow diverters in aneurysmal flow reduction, provided that the compaction produces a mesh denser than 2 overlapped flow diverters and this denser mesh covers a sufficient portion of the aneurysm orifice area, for which we suggest a minimum of 50%. This strategy is most effective for aneurysms with large orifices, especially fusiform aneurysms.
© 2017 by American Journal of Neuroradiology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28057633      PMCID: PMC5352494          DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A5062

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol        ISSN: 0195-6108            Impact factor:   3.825


  23 in total

1.  Intra-aneurysmal thrombosis as a possible cause of delayed aneurysm rupture after flow-diversion treatment.

Authors:  Z Kulcsár; E Houdart; A Bonafé; G Parker; J Millar; A J P Goddard; S Renowden; G Gál; B Turowski; K Mitchell; F Gray; M Rodriguez; R van den Berg; A Gruber; H Desal; I Wanke; D A Rüfenacht
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-11-11       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Enhanced aneurysmal flow diversion using a dynamic push-pull technique: an experimental and modeling study.

Authors:  D Ma; J Xiang; H Choi; T M Dumont; S K Natarajan; A H Siddiqui; H Meng
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2014-04-24       Impact factor: 3.825

3.  Computer modeling of deployment and mechanical expansion of neurovascular flow diverter in patient-specific intracranial aneurysms.

Authors:  Ding Ma; Gary F Dargush; Sabareesh K Natarajan; Elad I Levy; Adnan H Siddiqui; Hui Meng
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2012-07-20       Impact factor: 2.712

4.  Increasing flow diversion for cerebral aneurysm treatment using a single flow diverter.

Authors:  Jianping Xiang; Ding Ma; Kenneth V Snyder; Elad I Levy; Adnan H Siddiqui; Hui Meng
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 4.654

5.  Effects of flow-diverting device oversizing on hemodynamics alteration in cerebral aneurysms.

Authors:  F Mut; J R Cebral
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2012-05-03       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  The pipeline embolization device for the intracranial treatment of aneurysms trial.

Authors:  P K Nelson; P Lylyk; I Szikora; S G Wetzel; I Wanke; D Fiorella
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-12-09       Impact factor: 3.825

7.  Treatment of intracranial aneurysms by functional reconstruction of the parent artery: the Budapest experience with the pipeline embolization device.

Authors:  I Szikora; Z Berentei; Z Kulcsar; M Marosfoi; Z S Vajda; W Lee; A Berez; P K Nelson
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2010-02-11       Impact factor: 3.825

Review 8.  Current status of pipeline embolization device in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: a review.

Authors:  Mona M Y Tse; Bernard Yan; Richard J Dowling; Peter J Mitchell
Journal:  World Neurosurg       Date:  2012-10-03       Impact factor: 2.104

9.  Compaction of flow diverters improves occlusion of experimental wide-necked aneurysms.

Authors:  Jean-Christophe Gentric; Igor Salazkin; Guylaine Gevry; Jean Raymond; Tim Darsaut
Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg       Date:  2015-10-09       Impact factor: 5.836

10.  An original flow diversion device for the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: evaluation in the rabbit elastase-induced model.

Authors:  Chander Sadasivan; Liliana Cesar; Jaehoon Seong; Audrey Rakian; Qing Hao; Fermin O Tio; Ajay K Wakhloo; Baruch B Lieber
Journal:  Stroke       Date:  2009-01-15       Impact factor: 7.914

View more
  11 in total

1.  2D parametric contrast time-density analysis for the prediction of complete aneurysm occlusion at six months' post-flow diversion stent.

Authors:  Ahmed E Hussein; Meghana Shownkeen; Andre Thomas; Christopher Stapleton; Denise Brunozzi; Jessica Nelson; John Naumgart; Andreas Linninger; Gursant Atwal; Ali Alaraj
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-02-26       Impact factor: 1.610

2.  Flow diversion of fusiform intracranial aneurysms.

Authors:  Andrew Griffin; Emily Lerner; Adam Zuchowski; Ali Zomorodi; L Fernando Gonzalez; Erik F Hauck
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-06-20       Impact factor: 3.042

3.  Outcome prediction of intracranial aneurysm treatment by flow diverters using machine learning.

Authors:  Nikhil Paliwal; Prakhar Jaiswal; Vincent M Tutino; Hussain Shallwani; Jason M Davies; Adnan H Siddiqui; Rahul Rai; Hui Meng
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 4.047

4.  Hemodynamic differences by increasing low profile visualized intraluminal support (LVIS) stent local compaction across intracranial aneurysm orifice.

Authors:  Zhongbin Tian; Mingqi Zhang; Gaohui Li; Rongbo Jin; Xiaochang Leng; Ying Zhang; Kun Wang; Yisen Zhang; Xinjian Yang; Jianping Xiang; Jian Liu
Journal:  Interv Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-08-23       Impact factor: 1.610

5.  Computational Fluid Dynamics Using a Porous Media Setting Predicts Outcome after Flow-Diverter Treatment.

Authors:  M Beppu; M Tsuji; F Ishida; M Shirakawa; H Suzuki; S Yoshimura
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2020-10-01       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Interaction between Flow Diverter and Parent Artery of Intracranial Aneurysm: A Computational Study.

Authors:  Wenyu Fu; Qixiao Xia
Journal:  Appl Bionics Biomech       Date:  2017-10-25       Impact factor: 1.781

7.  A novel virtual flow diverter implantation method with realistic deployment mechanics and validated force response.

Authors:  Gábor Závodszky; Benjámin Csippa; György Paál; István Szikora
Journal:  Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-04-17       Impact factor: 2.747

Review 8.  Structural Design of Vascular Stents: A Review.

Authors:  Chen Pan; Yafeng Han; Jiping Lu
Journal:  Micromachines (Basel)       Date:  2021-06-29       Impact factor: 2.891

9.  Implementation of computer simulation to assess flow diversion treatment outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mingzi Zhang; Simon Tupin; Hitomi Anzai; Yutaro Kohata; Masaaki Shojima; Kosuke Suzuki; Yoshihiro Okamoto; Katsuhiro Tanaka; Takanobu Yagi; Soichiro Fujimura; Makoto Ohta
Journal:  J Neurointerv Surg       Date:  2020-10-23       Impact factor: 5.836

10.  Association Between Aneurysmal Haemodynamics and Device Microstructural Characteristics After Flow-Diversion Treatments With Dual Stents of Different Sizes: A Numerical Study.

Authors:  Mingzi Zhang; Simon Tupin; Yujie Li; Makoto Ohta
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 4.566

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.