Robert Kellermann1, Steffen Serowy2, Oliver Beuing1, Martin Skalej1. 1. Department of Neuroradiology, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Leipziger Straße 44, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany. 2. Department of Neuroradiology, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Leipziger Straße 44, 39112, Magdeburg, Germany. steffen.serowy@med.ovgu.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Flow diverter (FD) devices show severe shortening during deployment in dependency of the vessel geometry. Valid information regarding the geometry of the targeted vessel is therefore mandatory for correct device selection, and to avoid complications. But the geometry of diseased tortuous intracranial vessels cannot be measured accurately with standard methods. The goal of this study is to prove the accuracy of a novel virtual stenting method in prediction of the behavior of a FD in an individual vessel geometry. METHODS: We applied a virtual stenting method on angiographic 3D imaging data of the specific vasculature of patients, who underwent FD treatment. The planning tool analyzes the local vessel morphology and deploys the FD virtually. We measured in 18 cases the difference between simulated FD length and real FD length after treatment in a landmark-based registration of pre-/post-interventional 3D angiographic datasets. RESULTS: The mean value of length deviation of the virtual FD was 2.2 mm (SD ± 1.9 mm) equaling 9.5% (SD ± 8.2%). Underestimated cases present lower deviations compared with overestimated FDs. Flow diverter cases with a nominal device length of 20 mm had the highest prediction accuracy. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the virtual stenting method used in this study is capable of predicting FD length with a clinically sufficient accuracy in advance and could therefore be a helpful tool in intervention planning. Imaging data of high quality are mandatory, while processing and manipulation of the FD during the intervention may impact the accuracy.
PURPOSE: Flow diverter (FD) devices show severe shortening during deployment in dependency of the vessel geometry. Valid information regarding the geometry of the targeted vessel is therefore mandatory for correct device selection, and to avoid complications. But the geometry of diseased tortuous intracranial vessels cannot be measured accurately with standard methods. The goal of this study is to prove the accuracy of a novel virtual stenting method in prediction of the behavior of a FD in an individual vessel geometry. METHODS: We applied a virtual stenting method on angiographic 3D imaging data of the specific vasculature of patients, who underwent FD treatment. The planning tool analyzes the local vessel morphology and deploys the FD virtually. We measured in 18 cases the difference between simulated FD length and real FD length after treatment in a landmark-based registration of pre-/post-interventional 3D angiographic datasets. RESULTS: The mean value of length deviation of the virtual FD was 2.2 mm (SD ± 1.9 mm) equaling 9.5% (SD ± 8.2%). Underestimated cases present lower deviations compared with overestimated FDs. Flow diverter cases with a nominal device length of 20 mm had the highest prediction accuracy. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the virtual stenting method used in this study is capable of predicting FD length with a clinically sufficient accuracy in advance and could therefore be a helpful tool in intervention planning. Imaging data of high quality are mandatory, while processing and manipulation of the FD during the intervention may impact the accuracy.
Authors: Francesco Briganti; Giuseppe Leone; Mariano Marseglia; Giuseppe Mariniello; Ferdinando Caranci; Arturo Brunetti; Francesco Maiuri Journal: Neuroradiol J Date: 2015-08-27
Authors: Erik F Hauck; Sabareesh K Natarajan; David J Langer; L Nelson Hopkins; Adnan H Siddiqui; Elad I Levy Journal: Neurosurgery Date: 2010-12 Impact factor: 4.654
Authors: Hector Fernandez; Juan M Macho; Jordi Blasco; Luis San Roman; Werner Mailaender; Luis Serra; Ignacio Larrabide Journal: Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 2.924
Authors: J M Ospel; G Gascou; V Costalat; L Piergallini; K A Blackham; D W Zumofen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-02-07 Impact factor: 3.825
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
Authors: Fabrice Bing; Tim E Darsaut; Igor Salazkin; Alina Makoyeva; Guylaine Gevry; Jean Raymond Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2012-08-16 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Mario Zanaty; Nohra Chalouhi; Stavropoula I Tjoumakaris; Robert H Rosenwasser; L Fernando Gonzalez; Pascal Jabbour Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2014-02-28 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Ana Paula Narata; Laura Obradó; Raquel Kalé Moyano; Juan M Macho; Jordi Blasco; Antonio López Rueda; Luis San Roman; Sebastian Remollo; Claudia Marinelli; Rosana Cepeda; Héctor Fernández; Ignacio Larrabide Journal: Front Med Technol Date: 2021-09-17