RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Differences in hemodynamic characteristics under high packing density between the porous media model and finite element analysis in computational fluid dynamics of intracranial aneurysm virtual treatment
JF Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery
JO J NeuroIntervent Surg
FD BMJ Publishing Group Ltd.
SP 853
OP 858
DO 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-014218
VO 11
IS 8
A1 Yeqing Jiang
A1 Liang Ge
A1 Ruoyu Di
A1 Gang Lu
A1 Lei Huang
A1 Gaohui Li
A1 Xiaochang Leng
A1 Sufang Zhang
A1 Hailin Wan
A1 Daoying Geng
A1 Jianping Xiang
A1 Xiaolong Zhang
YR 2019
UL http://jnis.bmj.com/content/11/8/853.abstract
AB Objective This study aimed to compare the hemodynamic differences among no sac (NOS), porous media (POM) and finite element analysis (FEA) models to investigate the recurrence-related risks for coiled intracranial aneurysms (IAs).Methods The study enrolled 10 patients with 11 IAs who received simple coiling treatment and hemodynamic simulations were performed for all IAs using the above three models. Velocity, wall shear stress (WSS) and residual flow volume (RFV) were calculated and compared in order to assess the model differences for both aneurysm sac and parent vessel regions.Results For parent artery regions, all three models produced similar flow patterns and quantification analysis did not indicate differences in velocity and WSS (p>0.05). For aneurysm sac regions, the FEA model resulted in higher sac-maximized (0.18 m/s vs 0.06 m/s) and sac-averaged velocity (0.013 m/s vs 0.007 m/s), and higher sac-averaged (0.55 Pa vs 0.36 Pa, p=0.006) and sac-maximized WSS (12.1 Pa vs 6.6 Pa) than the POM model. The differences in RFV between the POM and FEA models under 11 different isovelocity thresholds (0.0001 m/s, 0.001 m/s, 0.002 m/s, 0.005 m/s, 0.01 m/s, 0.02 m/s, 0.05 m/s, 0.1 m/s, 0.2 m/s, 0.5 m/s, and 1 m/s) showed that the POM RFV was generally larger than those of the FEA model.Conclusions Compared with the FEA model, the POM model provides a lower velocity and WSS and higher RFV for the aneurysm sac, which could lead to incorrect estimates of the recurrent risk of coiled IAs under high packing density.