Kimberly A Stevens Boster1, Tanmay C Shidhore2, Aaron A Cohen-Gadol3, Ivan C Christov2, Vitaliy L Rayz4. 1. School of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA. kastevens@purdue.edu. 2. School of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA. 3. Department of Neurological Surgery, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, 46202, USA. 4. Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The significantly higher incidence of aneurysms in patients with arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) suggests a strong hemodynamic relationship between these lesions. The presence of an AVM alters hemodynamics in proximal vessels by drastically changing the distal resistance, thus affecting intra-aneurysmal flow. This study discusses the challenges associated with patient-specific modeling of aneurysms in the presence of AVMs. METHODS: We explore how the presence of a generic distal AVM affects upstream aneurysms by examining the relationship between distal resistance and aneurysmal wall shear stress using physiologically realistic estimates for the influence of the AVM on hemodynamics. Using image-based computational models of aneurysms and surrounding vasculature, aneurysmal wall-shear stress is calculated for a range of distal resistances corresponding to the presence of AVMs of various sizes and compared with a control case representing the absence of an AVM. RESULTS: In the patient cases considered, the alteration in aneurysmal wall shear stress due to the presence of an AVM is considerable, as much as 19 times the base case wall shear stress. Furthermore, the relationship between aneurysmal wall shear stress and distal resistance is shown to be highly geometry-dependent and nonlinear. In most cases, the range of physiologically realistic possibilities for AVM-related distal resistance are so large that patient-specific flow measurements are necessary for meaningful predictions of wall shear stress. CONCLUSIONS: The presented work offers insight on the impact of distal AVMs on aneurysmal wall shear stress using physiologically realistic computational models. Patient-specific modeling of hemodynamics in aneurysms and associated AVMs has great potential for understanding lesion pathogenesis, surgical planning, and assessing the effect of treatment of one lesion relative to another. However, we show that modeling approaches cannot usually meaningfully quantify the impact of AVMs if based solely on imaging data from CT and X-ray angiography, currently used in clinical practice. Based on recent studies, it appears that 4D flow MRI is one promising approach to obtaining meaningful patient-specific flow boundary conditions that improve modeling fidelity.
PURPOSE: The significantly higher incidence of aneurysms in patients with arteriovenous malformations (AVMs) suggests a strong hemodynamic relationship between these lesions. The presence of an AVM alters hemodynamics in proximal vessels by drastically changing the distal resistance, thus affecting intra-aneurysmal flow. This study discusses the challenges associated with patient-specific modeling of aneurysms in the presence of AVMs. METHODS: We explore how the presence of a generic distal AVM affects upstream aneurysms by examining the relationship between distal resistance and aneurysmal wall shear stress using physiologically realistic estimates for the influence of the AVM on hemodynamics. Using image-based computational models of aneurysms and surrounding vasculature, aneurysmal wall-shear stress is calculated for a range of distal resistances corresponding to the presence of AVMs of various sizes and compared with a control case representing the absence of an AVM. RESULTS: In the patient cases considered, the alteration in aneurysmal wall shear stress due to the presence of an AVM is considerable, as much as 19 times the base case wall shear stress. Furthermore, the relationship between aneurysmal wall shear stress and distal resistance is shown to be highly geometry-dependent and nonlinear. In most cases, the range of physiologically realistic possibilities for AVM-related distal resistance are so large that patient-specific flow measurements are necessary for meaningful predictions of wall shear stress. CONCLUSIONS: The presented work offers insight on the impact of distal AVMs on aneurysmal wall shear stress using physiologically realistic computational models. Patient-specific modeling of hemodynamics in aneurysms and associated AVMs has great potential for understanding lesion pathogenesis, surgical planning, and assessing the effect of treatment of one lesion relative to another. However, we show that modeling approaches cannot usually meaningfully quantify the impact of AVMs if based solely on imaging data from CT and X-ray angiography, currently used in clinical practice. Based on recent studies, it appears that 4D flow MRI is one promising approach to obtaining meaningful patient-specific flow boundary conditions that improve modeling fidelity.
Authors: P Fogarty-Mack; J Pile-Spellman; L Hacein-Bey; A Osipov; J DeMeritt; E C Jackson; W L Young Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 1996-09 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Philipp Berg; Samuel Voß; Sylvia Saalfeld; Gábor Janiga; Aslak W Bergersen; Kristian Valen-Sendstad; Jan Bruening; Leonid Goubergrits; Andreas Spuler; Nicole M Cancelliere; David A Steinman; Vitor M Pereira; Tin Lok Chiu; Anderson Chun On Tsang; Bong Jae Chung; Juan R Cebral; Salvatore Cito; Jordi Pallarès; Gabriele Copelli; Benjamin Csippa; György Paál; Soichiro Fujimura; Hiroyuki Takao; Simona Hodis; Georg Hille; Christof Karmonik; Saba Elias; Kerstin Kellermann; Muhammad Owais Khan; Alison L Marsden; Hernán G Morales; Senol Piskin; Ender A Finol; Mariya Pravdivtseva; Hamidreza Rajabzadeh-Oghaz; Nikhil Paliwal; Hui Meng; Santhosh Seshadhri; Matthew Howard; Masaaki Shojima; Shin-Ichiro Sugiyama; Kuniyasu Niizuma; Sergey Sindeev; Sergey Frolov; Thomas Wagner; Alexander Brawanski; Yi Qian; Yu-An Wu; Kent D Carlson; Dan Dragomir-Daescu; Oliver Beuing Journal: Cardiovasc Eng Technol Date: 2018-09-06 Impact factor: 2.495
Authors: W Chang; M W Loecher; Y Wu; D B Niemann; B Ciske; B Aagaard-Kienitz; S Kecskemeti; K M Johnson; O Wieben; C Mistretta; P Turski Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2012-04-12 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Loic Boussel; Vitaliy Rayz; Charles McCulloch; Alastair Martin; Gabriel Acevedo-Bolton; Michael Lawton; Randall Higashida; Wade S Smith; William L Young; David Saloner Journal: Stroke Date: 2008-08-07 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: J Cebral; E Ollikainen; B J Chung; F Mut; V Sippola; B R Jahromi; R Tulamo; J Hernesniemi; M Niemelä; A Robertson; J Frösen Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2016-09-29 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: S A Ansari; S Schnell; T Carroll; P Vakil; M C Hurley; C Wu; J Carr; B R Bendok; H Batjer; M Markl Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2013-05-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Maria Aristova; Alireza Vali; Sameer A Ansari; Ali Shaibani; Tord D Alden; Michael C Hurley; Babak S Jahromi; Matthew B Potts; Michael Markl; Susanne Schnell Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2019-05-09 Impact factor: 4.813