| Literature DB >> 29282628 |
Claudio Chiastra1, Susanna Migliori2, Francesco Burzotta3, Gabriele Dubini2, Francesco Migliavacca2.
Abstract
The recent widespread application of optical coherence tomography (OCT) in interventional cardiology has improved patient-specific modeling of stented coronary arteries for the investigation of local hemodynamics. In this review, the workflow for the creation of fluid dynamics models of stented coronary arteries from OCT images is presented. The algorithms for lumen contours and stent strut detection from OCT as well as the reconstruction methods of stented geometries are discussed. Furthermore, the state of the art of studies that investigate the hemodynamics of OCT-based stented coronary artery geometries is reported. Although those studies analyzed few patient-specific cases, the application of the current reconstruction methods of stented geometries to large populations is possible. However, the improvement of these methods and the reduction of the time needed for the entire modeling process are crucial for a widespread clinical use of the OCT-based models and future in silico clinical trials.Entities:
Keywords: Computational fluid dynamics; Computer simulations; Coronary artery; Image processing; Image segmentation; In silico clinical trial; Optical coherence tomography; Stent
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29282628 PMCID: PMC5908818 DOI: 10.1007/s12265-017-9777-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Cardiovasc Transl Res ISSN: 1937-5387 Impact factor: 4.132
Fig. 1Workflow for the creation of patient-specific stented coronary artery models from OCT images: A) collection of patient’s clinical data, B) detection of lumen contours and stent struts from OCT images using automatic segmentation algorithms, C) extraction of vessel centerline from angiography (or computed tomography), D) 3D reconstruction of stented geometries by combining the detected lumen contours and stent struts with the vessel centerline, E) execution of CFD simulations
List of published studies on (semi-)automatic lumen and stent strut detection algorithms of coronary artery OCT images
| First author, year [reference] | Lumen segmentation | Stent segmentation | Software/programming language | Calculation time (hardware) | Ground truth for validation | Number of OCT pullbacks (frames) | OCT system |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sihan et al., 2009 [ | Yes | No | Matlab | 2–5 s/frame (ND) | Manual segmentation | 20 pullbacks from 20 patients (4137 frames) | LightLab Imaging, Inc. |
| Gurmeric et al., 2009 [ | Yes | Yes | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 7 pullbacks from 7 patients (39 frames) | M2 (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Wang Z. et al., 2010 [ | Yes | No | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 9 pullbacks from 8 patients (63 frames) | M4 (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Unal et al., 2010 [ | Yes | Yes | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 7 pullbacks from 7 patients (39 frames) | M2 (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Kauffmann et al., 2010 [ | Yes | Yes | Interface description language | 0.8 s/frame (Intel Pentium 4 3.4 GHz, 1 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 11 pullbacks from 11 patients, 1 pullback from 1 phantom (stented urinary catheter) | M2 (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Tung et al., 2011 [ | Yes | No | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 4 pullbacks from 4 patients (ND) | M4 (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Wang Z. et al., 2011 [ | Yes | No | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 9 pullbacks from 8 patients (63 frames) | M4 (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Xu et al., 2011 [ | No | Yes | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 9 pullbacks from 9 patients (613 frames) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Bruining et al., 2011 [ | No | Yes | ND | 4.1 s/frame for the post-implant group (ND) | Manual segmentation | 29 pullbacks (4024 frames) | LightLab Imaging, Inc. |
| Athanasiou et al., 2012 [ | Yes | No | ND | ND (ND) | Not performed | 1 pullback from 1 patient (ND) | LightLab Imaging, Inc. |
| Lu et al., 2012 [ | No | Yes | ND | ~ 9 s/frame (ND) | Manual segmentation | 6 pullbacks from 6 patients (frames ND) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Tung et al., 2012 [ | No | Yes | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 4 pullbacks from 4 patients (frames ND) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Ughi et al., 2012 [ | Yes | Yes | Matlab, C++ | < 1 s/frame (ND) | Manual segmentation | 9 pullbacks from 9 patients (108 frames) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Moraes et al., 2013 [ | Yes | No | Matlab | 5.9 ± 3 s/frame (Intel Core 2 Duo 2.53 GHz, 4 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 5 pullbacks from 2 patients, 2 pigs, 1 rabbit (290 frames) | LightLab Imaging, Inc. |
| Wang A. et al., 2013 [ | No | Yes | MeVisLab toolbox, C++ | < 1.1 s/frame (2.0 GHz CPU, 4 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 10 pullbacks from 7 patients (3231 frames, 18,311 struts) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Han et al., 2013 [ | Yes | Yes | Intel IPP library on CPU, CUDA technology on GPU | < 0.279 s/frame (ND) | Manual segmentation | 3 pullbacks from 3 patients (369 frames, 3712 struts) | ND |
| Wang A. et al., 2014 [ | No | Yes* | MeVisLab toolbox, C++ | ND | Manual segmentation | 6 pullbacks from 6 patients (frames ND, 4691 struts) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Celi and Berti, 2014 [ | Yes | No | Matlab | 13 s/frame (Intel Core 2 Quad processors (2.67 GHz, 4 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 10 pullbacks from 10 patients (2800 frames) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Chatzizisis et al., 2014 [ | Yes | No | Matlab | < 1 s/frame (ND) | Manual segmentation | 20 pullbacks from 20 patients (1682 frames) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Wang Z. et al., 2015 [ | No | Yes | Matlab, C++ | ~ 1.5 s/frame (duo-core 3.0 GHz) | Manual segmentation | 103 patients from 78 pullbacks (8000 frames) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| Dubuisson et al., 2015 [ | Yes | Yes | ND | Few minutes per pullback (ND) | Manual segmentation | 4 pullbacks from 4 patients (77 frames) | C7-XR (LightLab Imaging, Inc.) |
| Han et al., 2015 [ | Yes | Yes | Visual Studio, CUDA 5.0, Qt 5.0, VTK 6.0 | < 0.1 s/frame (Intel Xeon E5-2630 2.30 GHz, 2 Nvidia GTX680, 32 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 5 pullbacks from 5 patients (305 frames) | ND |
| de Macedo et al., 2016 [ | Yes | No | Matlab | 15 s/frame (Intel i7 3.46 GHz, 32 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 9 pullbacks from 9 patients (1328 frames) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| Guha Roy et al., 2016 [ | Yes | No | Matlab | 18.82 ± 1.77 s/frame (Intel i3 2.50 GHz, 4 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 15 pullbacks from 15 ex vivo human arteries, 6 pullbacks from 6 patients (ND) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| Nam et al., 2016 [ | Yes | Yes | Matlab | ~ 0.47 s/frame (Intel Pentium G850 2.9 GHz, 8 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 20 pullbacks from 18 patients (800 frames) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| O’Brien et al., 2016 [ | Yes | Yes | ND | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 4 pullbacks from 4 pigs (62 frames for the lumen, 57 frames for the stent) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| Cao et al., 2017 [ | Yes | No | ND | ND (ND) | Against method by Ughi et al. [ | 5 pullbacks from 5 patients (880 frames) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| Cheimariotis et al., 2017 [ | Yes | No | ND | 1 s/frame (ND) | Manual segmentation | 20 pullbacks from 20 patients (1812 frames) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| Chiastra et al., 2017 [ | Yes | Yes | Matlab | ~ 0.55 s/frame (Intel i7-950 3.07 GHz and 16 GB RAM) | Manual segmentation | 14 pullbacks from 8 coronary bifurcation phantoms (160 frames), 4 pullbacks from 4 patients | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
| Migliori et al., 2017 [ | Yes | Yes | Matlab | ND (ND) | Manual segmentation | 1 pullback from 1 coronary phantom (95 frames for the lumen, 120 frames for the stent) | C7-XR (St. Jude Medical) |
ND not declared
*Algorithm applied to polymeric bioresorbable scaffolds
Fig. 2Example of lumen detection algorithm. a Original grayscale OCT image. b Pre-processed image without OCT catheter. c Pre-processed image in polar coordinates. The red line highlights an example of A-scan. d Raw lumen contour detection (blue). e Lumen contour (blue) detected after gap closing and smoothing. f Lumen contour (blue) after conversion to Cartesian coordinates. The polar coordinate system (r; θ) or the Cartesian coordinate system (i; j) is indicated on the top left of each image. The example refers to a post-operative OCT image of a patient treated at the Institute of Cardiology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart (Rome, Italy), with a Xience Prime stent (Abbott Vascular, USA). The image was processed using the algorithm described in [41, 42]
Fig. 3Example of stent strut detection algorithm (a–f): a Original grayscale OCT image. b Pre-processed image without OCT catheter. c Pre-processed image in polar coordinates. d Detected struts (red) after raw detection. e Detected struts (red) after removal of false positives. f Detected struts (red) after conversion to Cartesian coordinates. Example of strut detection (g, h): g Two A-scans are analyzed. A-scan 1 includes a stent strut while A-scan 2 is only the vessel wall. h Corresponding intensity profiles of A-scans 1 and 2. The strut is detected because of the higher slope of the A-scan intensity profile. The polar coordinate system (r; θ) or the Cartesian coordinate system (i; j) is indicated on the top left of the images. The example refers to a post-operative OCT frame of a patient treated at the Institute of Cardiology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart (Rome, Italy), with a Xience Prime stent (Abbott Vascular, USA). The image was processed using the algorithm described in [41, 42]
Fig. 4Differences between strut appearance of metallic and polymeric stents in OCT images: a post-operative OCT image of a patient treated at the Institute of Cardiology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart (Rome, Italy), with a Magmaris stent (Biotronik, Germany) (bioresorbable metallic stent). b Post-operative OCT image of a patient treated with an Absorb BVS (Abbott Vascular, USA) (bioresorbable polymeric stent). OPTIS™ Stent Optimization Software (St. Jude Medical, USA). Image provided courtesy of St. Jude Medical, Inc.
Fig. 5Validation of the stent strut detection algorithm using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) [41]. a Details of Resolute Integrity (Medtronic, USA) (top) and Xience Prime (Abbott Vascular, USA) (bottom) stents deployed in 40° coronary bifurcation phantoms. b Superimposition of the stent point clouds obtained using the automatic detection algorithm and micro-CT for the Resolute Integrity (left) and Xience Prime (right) cases. Adapted with permission from [41]
Fig. 6Example of morphing procedure for the creation of a patient-specific stent model from OCT data. a The stent skeleton in straight expanded configuration (i.e., the straight stent centerline) is morphed on the OCT stent point cloud to generate the deployed configuration of the stent centerline (i.e., morphed stent centerline) and subsequently the 3D stent geometry. b Morphing of the centerline by using handles to minimize its distance with the OCT stent point cloud. The example refers to a post-operative OCT dataset of a patient treated at the Institute of Cardiology, Catholic University of the Sacred Heart (Rome, Italy), with a Xience Prime stent (Abbott Vascular, USA). The morphing procedure is based on the method described in [42]
List of published studies on fluid dynamics simulations of stented coronary artery models reconstructed from OCT
| First author, year [reference] | Number of cases (stent type) | Follow-up | 3D model reconstruction | Software (analysis type) | Blood description | Boundary conditions | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Ellwein et al., 2011 [ | 1 patient (DES) | Month 6 | CT + OCT | ALTAIR LesLib (pulsatile) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: Womersley velocity profile ( | Method for patient-specific coronary artery reconstruction for CFD analyses |
| Gogas et al., 2013 [ | 1 patient (Absorb BVS) | No | 2 angio + OCT | LifeV (ND) | ND | ND | Proof-of-concept study |
| Papafaklis et al., 2013 [ | 1 patient (Absorb BVS) | Month 6 | 2 angio + OCT | ANSYS CFX (steady state) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: flat velocity profile (FCM) | Higher relationship between WSS and NIH for OCT-based than IVUS-based analysis |
| Bourantas et al., 2014 [ | 12 patients (Absorb BVS) | Month 12 | OCT | ANSYS CFX (steady state) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: flat velocity profile (FCM) | Inverse correlation between WSS and NIH ( |
| Bourantas et al., 2014 [ | 6 patients (Absorb BVS) | Month 6 or 12 | 2 angio + OCT | ANSYS CFX (steady state) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: flat velocity profile (FCM) | Fusion of OCT with angiography better than IVUS-based reconstructions. |
| Gogas et al., 2016 [ | 1 patient (Absorb BVS) | No | 2 angio + OCT | LifeV (ND) | ND | ND | Proof-of-concept study |
| Chiastra et al., 2016 [ | 2 patients (DES) | No | CT + OCT + finite element analysis of stent deployment | SimVascular (pulsatile) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: Womersley velocity profile ( | Workflow for pre-interventional planning |
| O’Brien et al., 2016 [ | 1 pig (BMS) | No | 2 angio + OCT + stent morphing | ANSYS Fluent (steady state) | Non-Newtonian fluid (Carreau model), | Inlet: parabolic velocity profile ( | Enhanced method to characterize implant microenvironments (stent geometry and fluid dynamics) |
| Tenekecioglu et al., 2016 [ | 2 pigs (Absorb BVS, Mirage BMRS) | No | 2 angio + OCT | ND (steady state and pulsatile) | ND | Inlet: FCM | Absorb BVS is associated to lower WSS than Mirage BMRS |
| Huang et al., 2017 [ | 1 patient (Absorb BVS) | No | 2 angio + OCT | ANSYS (pulsatile) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: Womersley velocity profile ( | Hemodynamic characterization of the Absorb BVS in a patient-specific environment |
| Tenekecioglu et al., 2017 [ | 6 pigs (Absorb BVS) | Month 1 | 2 angio + OCT | ANSYS Fluent (steady state) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: flat velocity profile (FCM) | Absorb BVS induces fluctuations of WSS, which are related to pathologic findings in stented segments |
| Tenekecioglu et al., 2017 [ | 1 pig (ArterioSorb-95 μm, ArterioSorb-120 μm) | No | 2 angio + OCT | ND (steady state) | ND | ND | Lumen exposure to low WSS is lower for the ArterioSorb-95 μm than the ArterioSorb-120 μm |
| Tenekecioglu et al., 2017 [ | 2 pigs (Absorb BVS, ArterioSorb-95 μm) | No | 2 angio + OCT | ND (pulsatile) | ND | ND | ArterioSorb resulted in higher WSS than Absorb BVS during all phases of coronary flow |
| Thondapu et al., 2017 [ | 1 patient (Absorb BVS) | Month 60 | 2 angio + OCT | ND (pulsatile) | Non-Newtonian fluid (model ND), ρ ND | ND | Lumen exposure to low WSS decreases after 5 years post-implantation |
| Torii et al., 2017 [ | 2 patients (Absorb BVS) | Month 60 | 2 angio + OCT | ANSYS Fluent (steady state) | Newtonian fluid ( | Inlet: flat velocity profile (FCM) | WSS is different in the case of underexpanded or overexpanded stent |
| Migliori et al., 2017 [ | 1 coronary artery phantom (BMS) | No | 2 angio + OCT + stent morphing | ANSYS Fluent (pulsatile) | Non-Newtonian fluid (Carreau model), | Inlet: flat velocity profile ( | Validated method to reconstruct high-fidelity stented geometries for CFD analyses |
BMS bare metal stent, DES drug-eluting stent, Absorb BVS Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (Abbott Vascular), Mirage BMRS Mirage bioresorbable micro-fiber scaffold (Manli Cardiology Ltd., Singapore), ArterioSorb bioresorbable scaffold (Arterius), angio angiography, FCM frame count method, Qin inlet flow rate, NIH neointimal hyperplasia, IVUS intravascular ultrasound, ND not declared