Virtual endovascular treatment of intracranial aneurysms: models and uncertainty

Abstract

Virtual endovascular treatment models (VETMs) have been developed with the view to aid interventional neuroradiologists and neurosurgeons to pre-operatively analyze the comparative efficacy and safety of endovascular treatments for intracranial aneurysms. Based on the current state of VETMs in aneurysm rupture risk stratification and in patient-specific prediction of treatment outcomes, we argue there is a need to go beyond personalized biomechanical flow modeling assuming deterministic parameters and error-free measurements. The mechanobiological effects associated with blood clot formation are important factors in therapeutic decision making and models of post-treatment intra-aneurysmal biology and biochemistry should be linked to the purely hemodynamic models to improve the predictive power of current VETMs. The influence of model and parameter uncertainties associated to each component of a VETM is, where feasible, quantified via a random-effects meta-analysis of the literature. This allows estimating the pooled effect size of these uncertainties on aneurysmal wall shear stress. From such meta-analyses, two main sources of uncertainty emerge where research efforts have so far been limited: (1) vascular wall distensibility, and (2) intra/intersubject systemic flow variations. In the future, we suggest that current deterministic computational simulations need to be extended with strategies for uncertainty mitigation, uncertainty exploration, and sensitivity reduction techniques. WIREs Syst Biol Med 2017, 9:e1385. doi: 10.1002/wsbm.1385 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

The effect of Dean, Reynolds and Womersley numbers on the flow in a spherical cavity on a curved round pipe. Part 2. The haemodynamics of intracranial aneurysms treated with flow-diverting stents

“…Wall distensibility was not considered in this study, partially due to the growing consensus that compliance in the aneurysmal wall has a smaller influence on intracranial aneurysm flow than most of the other sources of uncertainty in patient-specific models, such as patient parent vessel flow, segmentation error in the analysis, etc. In a summary of studies comparing the differences between rigid-wall and fluid–structure interaction simulations of cerebral aneurysms, Sarrami-Foroushani, Lassila & Frangi (2017) showed that the rigid-wall assumption often results in a small overestimation of haemodynamic metrics of the order of 10 %, such as wall shear stress, but that the main flow features are preserved. In an experimental analysis of the flow inside untreated cerebral aneurysms, the addition of wall compliance was shown to affect the phase shift of the flow fields and the development of small-scale flow features near the aneurysm wall that were not found in the rigid model (Tupin, Saqr & Ohta 2020).…”

Population‐specific modelling of between/within‐subject flow variability in the carotid arteries of the elderly

“…If normative flow boundary conditions are used instead, derived quantities of flow, such as WSS, may incur large errors and uncertainties. In the context of intracranial aneurysm flow modelling, previous meta‐analysis showed that the use of patient‐unspecific boundary conditions leads to a moderate‐sized effect (Hedges' g =0.30) when evaluating WSS patterns on the aneurysmal endothelium. This uncertainty can be multiplied by the presence of within‐subject flow variability.…”

“…Another study observed that flow rate variability has an effect on the predicted performance of flow diverters in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Such results indicate that both the flow variability and the specific demographics of the target patient population should be taken into account in vascular CFD simulations …”

Evaluation of Examiner Performance Using a Duplex Ultrasound Simulator. Flow Velocity Measurements in Dialysis Access Fistula Models

“…The Navier-Stokes equations that describe the flowing blood are solved by a commercial CFD software package (Fluent, ANSYS Inc., Cannonsburg, PA, USA) under the assumptions of an incompressible Newtonian fluid. Although blood is a non-Newtonian fluid, it has been shown that the Newtonian fluid assumption works well for arteries over 3 mm in diameter and under normal hematocrit conditions (Sarrami-Foroushani et al 2017). Therefore, for the specific vessels under consideration in our simulation, blood is treated as a Newtonian fluid without loss of accuracy in the hemodynamic results.…”