| Literature DB >> 35127854 |
Xiaodong Zhai1,2, Yadong Wang1,2,3, Gang Fang4, Peng Hu1,2, Hongqi Zhang1,2, Chengcheng Zhu5.
Abstract
Despite the devastating consequences of aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH), the mechanisms underlying the formation, progression, and rupture of intracranial aneurysms (IAs) are complex and not yet fully clear. In a real-world situation, continuously observing the process of aneurysm development in humans appears unrealistic, which also present challenges for the understanding of the underlying mechanism. We reported the relatively complete course of IA development in two real patients. On this basis, computational fluid dynamics simulation (CFD) was performed to evaluate the changes in hemodynamics and analyze the mechanism underlying the formation, progression, and rupture of IAs. Our results suggested that the formation and progression of IAs can be a dynamic process, with constantly changing hemodynamic characteristics. CFD analysis based on medical imaging provides the opportunity to study the hemodynamic conditions over time. From these two rare cases, we found that concentrated high-velocity inflow jets, flows with vortex structures, extremely high WSS, and a very steep WSSG were correlated with the formation of IAs. Complex multi-vortex flows are possibly related to IAs prior to growth, and the rupture of IAs is possibly related to low WSS, extreme instability and complexity of flow patterns. Our findings provide unique insight into the theoretical hemodynamic mechanism underlying the formation and progression of IAs. Given the small sample size the findings of this study have to be considered preliminary and exploratory.Entities:
Keywords: computational fluid dynamics; dynamic changes; hemodynamic analysis; intracranial aneurysms; natural history
Year: 2022 PMID: 35127854 PMCID: PMC8814101 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2021.775536
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Figure 1(A) Patient 1 is a 56-year-old female. No significant abnormalities were observed by the baseline MRA. MRA reexamination about 4 years later showed a newly formed saccular aneurysm with a diameter of 3.2 mm in the left posterior communicating artery. CTA showed that the aneurysm had significantly increased in size, reaching a diameter of 6.9 mm. (B) Patient 2 is a 47-year-old female. No significant abnormalities were observed by the baseline MRA. A newly formed basilar tip aneurysm and aneurysmal enlargement were observed in the subsequent MRA examinations at follow-up (from 2.1 to 3.8 mm in diameter). Registration of 3D surfaces with different degrees of transparency showed changes on continuous follow-up angiography.
Figure 2This figure illustrates the change in hemodynamic parameters during the formation, progression and rupture of IAs. The WSS distribution (A,C) and flow velocity profile (B,D) were shown, respectively. The area within the yellow line is the region of aneurysmal formation marked by the registration technique. Prior to aneurysm formation, the regions feature flows with vortex structures (B, short white arrow). In the impact region (D, Baseline, red arrows) of the concentrated high-velocity inflow jet (D, Baseline, long white arrow indicates blood flow direction), a newly formed basilar tip aneurysm was visible on follow-up angiography (D). Affected by vortex flow after the formation of the aneurysm (D, Formation, white short arrow), the main direction of flow shifted (D, Formation, from the original dotted arrow to the long white arrow), causing saccular dilatation in the new impact region (D, Formation, red arrows), and the size of the aneurysm increased (D, Growth). A complex multi-vortex flow is associated with future aneurysm growth, and rupture is related to extreme instability and complexity of blood flow patterns.
Figure 3(A,B) Display the trends in the main hemodynamic parameters of patient 1 and patient 2, respectively, during continuous follow-up angiography. WSS, wall shear stress; WSSG, wall shear stress gradient; EL, energy loss.
The hemodynamic parameters result of included patients.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient 1 | Parent artery | 6.0 | 1 | 372.2 | 230.0 | 1 | – |
| Patient 1 | Baseline | 8.5 | 1.4 | 564.7 | 281.9 | 1.2 | 5.12E-06 |
| Patient 1 | Formation | 6.3 | 0.9 | 609.4 | 317.5 | 1.2 | 7.33E-06 |
| Patient 1 | Rupture | 3.8 | 0.6 | 268.9 | 316.4 | 1.1 | 8.74E-06 |
| Patient 2 | Parent artery | 5.7 | 1 | 555.2 | 313.5 | 1 | – |
| Patient 2 | Baseline | 10.7 | 1.9 | 1,262.3 | 438.6 | 1.4 | 1.44E-05 |
| Patient 2 | Formation | 11.3 | 2.0 | 1,284.8 | 435.7 | 1.4 | 2.17E-05 |
| Patient 2 | Growth | 8.7 | 1.4 | 1,016.0 | 570.1 | 1.3 | 2.42E-05 |
WSS, wall shear stress; WSSG, wall shear stress gradient; NWSS, normalized wall shear stress; NP, normalized pressure.