Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

Research ArticleInterventional

Does Arterial Flow Rate Affect the Assessment of Flow-Diverter Stent Performance?

H.G. Morales, O. Bonnefous, A.J. Geers, O. Brina, V.M. Pereira, L. Spelle, J. Moret and I. Larrabide
American Journal of Neuroradiology December 2016, 37 (12) 2293-2298; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A4933
H.G. Morales
aFrom Medisys-Philips Research (H.G.M., O.Bonnefous), Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for H.G. Morales
O. Bonnefous
aFrom Medisys-Philips Research (H.G.M., O.Bonnefous), Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for O. Bonnefous
A.J. Geers
bCentre for Cardiovascular Science (A.J.G.), University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland
cDepartment of Information and Communication Technologies (A.J.G.), Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for A.J. Geers
O. Brina
dDepartment of Information Neuroradiology (O.Brina), University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for O. Brina
V.M. Pereira
eDepartment of Medical Imaging and Department of Surgery (V.M.P.), University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for V.M. Pereira
L. Spelle
fInterventional Neuroradiology (L.S., J.M.), Beaujon University Hospital, Clichy, France
gParis Diderot University (L.S.), Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for L. Spelle
J. Moret
fInterventional Neuroradiology (L.S., J.M.), Beaujon University Hospital, Clichy, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for J. Moret
I. Larrabide
hPLADEMA-CONICET (I.L.), Universidad Nacional del Centro de la Provincia de Buenos Aires, Tandil, Argentina.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for I. Larrabide
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Our aim was to assess the performance of flow-diverter stents. The pre- and end-of-treatment angiographies are commonly compared. However, the arterial flow rate may change between acquisitions; therefore, a better understanding of its influence on the local intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics before and after flow-diverter stent use is required.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-five image-based aneurysm models extracted from 3D rotational angiograms were conditioned for computational fluid dynamics simulations. Pulsatile simulations were performed at different arterial flow rates, covering a wide possible range of physiologic flows among 1–5 mL/s. The effect of flow-diverter stents on intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics was numerically simulated with a porous medium model. Spatiotemporal-averaged intra-aneurysmal flow velocity and flow rate were calculated for each case to quantify the hemodynamics after treatment. The short-term flow-diverter stent performance was characterized by the relative velocity reduction inside the aneurysm.

RESULTS: Spatiotemporal-averaged intra-aneurysmal flow velocity before and after flow-diverter stent use is linearly proportional to the mean arterial flow rate (minimum R2 > 0.983 of the linear regression models for untreated and stented models). Relative velocity reduction asymptotically decreases with increasing mean arterial flow rate. When the most probable range of arterial flow rate was considered (3–5 mL/s), instead of the wide possible flow range, the mean SD of relative velocity reduction was reduced from 3.6% to 0.48%.

CONCLUSIONS: Both intra-aneurysmal aneurysm velocity and flow-diverter stent performance depend on the arterial flow rate. The performance could be considered independent of the arterial flow rates within the most probable range of physiologic flows.

ABBREVIATIONS:

CFD
computational fluid dynamics
m
ratio between the aneurysm velocity and the arterial flow
Q̅
mean arterial flow rate
Qmin
minimum arterial flow rate required to have a distinguishable velocity inside the aneurysm
s
stented
u
untreated
velred
relative velocity reduction
v̅e̅l̅sa
spatiotemporal-averaged flow velocity

Flow diverters are low-porosity stents designed to reduce the blood flow inside the aneurysm cavity. They also serve as a scaffold for neointima formation at the aneurysm ostium.1,2 To evaluate the potential occlusion performance by intrasaccular thrombus formation, one must conduct middle- and long-term observations. However, to foresee these future conditions and to assess potential short-term complications, one must evaluate immediate posttreatment hemodynamic features using the end-of-treatment angiography.3⇓–5

Qualitative, angiography-based metrics of short-term hemodynamics have been proposed, such as the SMART (simple measurement of aneurysm residual after treatment) scale or grading of the intrasaccular contrast flow speed.6,7 Additionally, more complex quantitative techniques have been introduced by processing the pre- and posttreatment angiograms.8 In most of these techniques, information about the contrast propagation is directly compared between pre- and posttreatment angiograms without paying attention to the potential arterial flow rate changes between image acquisitions and its impact on aneurysmal hemodynamics. It has been reported that change in 30%–50% of the mean arterial flow rate could lead to a 30%–80% variation of hemodynamic quantities, such as mean flow velocity, aneurysm inflow, or wall shear stress.9

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of the arterial flow rate on flow-diverter stent performance. Because patient-specific flow measurements are not unique and depend on the instance at which a medical examination is performed, a wide range of flow rates was considered.

Materials and Methods

Twenty-five aneurysms from different patients were investigated. 3D rotational angiography images of the aneurysms and their surrounding vasculature were acquired with an x-ray system (Allura Xper FD20; Philips Healthcare, Best, the Netherlands). All aneurysms were located between the siphon of the internal carotid artery and its downstream bifurcation. Medical data were collected by 2 departments of interventional neuroradiology: University Hospitals of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland, and Beaujon University Hospital, France.

From these images, a surface mesh was extracted by image segmentation. The surface meshes were cleaned and smoothed. Hexahedral meshes inside each vascular model were generated with a cell size of 0.2 mm at the wall, 0.1 mm in the porous medium, and 0.2 mm elsewhere, with 4 cells between sizes. The total number of elements ranged between 2.08 × 105 and 6.44 × 105. For a given case, the same mesh was used for both untreated and stented models. More details about the mesh strategies can be found elsewhere.10⇓–12

In these volumetric meshes, governing equations of flow motion were solved by using the open-source computational fluid dynamics (CFD) package OpenFOAM 2.2.1 (www.openfoam.org). Arterial walls were considered rigid and nonslippery (flow velocity = 0). Blood was modeled as a Newtonian and incompressible fluid, with the knowledge that changes in blood viscosity due to increments in shear strain rates can be neglected.13 A parabolic profile was set at the inlet of each vascular model as a spatial condition, which changes in time according to the pulsatile waveform (temporal variation). Zero-pressure conditions were imposed at all outlets. Details of this methodology can be found elsewhere.10

Arterial Flow Rates

To single out the effect of the mean arterial flow rate, Q̅, the same shape of the flow waveform was used for all simulations, which was scaled to achieve the desired Q̅ (Fig 1). The waveform was originally extracted from a DSA sequence of a patient by using valid optical flow techniques.14⇓–16 Per case, 9 pulsatile flow simulations were created. Five of those flows were set within the most probable range (3 mL/s to 5 mL/s),17,18 every 0.5 mL/s. To cover lower flows, which occurs according to a possible range among 1 mL/s to 5 mL/s, we used both the inlet-area flow condition19 and the 1.5-Pa wall shear stress condition at the inlet. In case those strategies provided a value within 3 mL/s to 5 mL/s, flow rate values were imposed at 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mL/s.10 With this configuration, the highest simulated flow rate has a systolic value of 7.56 mL/s, which is below the highest values measured in patients (>11 mL/s).17

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Waveform (Q̅= 3 mL/s).

Virtual Stent Placement

To model the influence of a flow-diverter stent on the intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics, we placed a porous medium at the aneurysm ostium. This medium locally imposes an additional hydraulic resistance to flow and has been previously used.11,20⇓⇓–23 The Darcy-Forchheimer law was used in the porous medium, which includes both viscous- and inertia-related pressure losses. The parameters of this medium used were k = 8.7 × 10−7 (viscosity term) and F = 8.1 × 104 (inertia term), and an equivalent porosity of around 70% was imposed. Details of the volumetric porous medium approach can be found elsewhere.11

Data Analysis

The following analysis was conducted to characterize the flow-diverter stent performance at different arterial flow rates.

Inside the aneurysm, the spatiotemporal-averaged flow velocity, v̅e̅l̅sa, was calculated, which has been shown to be independent of the waveform shape.12,24 Per case, linear regression models were applied to the untreated and stented datasets. The goal was to confirm that v̅e̅l̅sa can be characterized as a linear function of Q̅ (see Equation 1) for untreated aneurysms12 and to extend this characterization of the v̅e̅l̅sa after treatment under the hypothesis that this relationship should be preserved. Embedded Image

In Equation 1, the parameters m and Qmin are given by the linear regression models applied on the results of the CFD simulations, but they can also be derived from measurements by using functional image analysis.14,15 Qmin can be interpreted as the minimum arterial flow rate required to have a distinguishable velocity inside the aneurysm. The parameter m represents the ratio between the aneurysm velocity and the arterial flow.

Afterward, the flow-diverter stent performance was characterized by the relative velocity reduction, velred: Embedded Image where the indexes u and s stand for untreated and stented, respectively. By placing Equation 1 inside Equation 2 for both untreated and stented conditions, defining the slope ratio rm = ms / mu, and making Q̅s = Q̅u = Q̅, Equation 2 becomes: Embedded Image

To evaluate when velred becomes independent of the flow rate, Equation 3 was derived with respect to Q̅ and set to zero: Embedded Image where ΔQmin = Qmin,s−Qmin,u. Equation 4 is satisfied under 2 conditions:

  • The ratio rm is zero, meaning that the slope after stent placement (ms) is zero or “tiny” with respect to the slope before treatment (mu), ie, mu ≫ ms.

  • ΔQmin = 0, meaning that the Qmin before and after stent placement are the same (Qmin,s ≈ Qmin,u).

A less-evident third condition may occur in the case that both, Qmin,s and Qmin,u (in Equation 3), are small compared with Q̅. In this situation, equation 3 becomes Embedded Image

Results

In all cases, flow direction was changed after treatment. The porous medium produced an additional hydraulic resistance to flow near the aneurysm ostium, thus reducing the amount of flow that penetrates the aneurysm. Figure 2 shows examples of the flow patterns that can be obtained after flow diversion by using a porous medium. These results are similar to those using explicit stent models.25⇓–27 In general, it seems that the flow patterns were unaltered when Q̅ was changed.

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Peak systolic instantaneous streamlines of velocity and an aneurysmal cut plane for case 8 at 2 arterial flow rates. Untreated and stented models are in the upper and lower rows, respectively.

v̅e̅l̅sa linearly increased when Q̅ goes up before and after treatment for all cases (minimum R2 > 0.995 for untreated and R2 > 0.983 for stented cases). The Table presents the results of the linear regressions that were applied for each case before and after treatment. Moreover for all cases, the slope m was reduced (rm < 1) and Qmin,s > Qmin,u (ΔQ > 0) after flow-diverter stent placement. Figure 3 depicts the v̅e̅l̅sa as a function of Q̅ for cases 1 and 8 as a visual example of these results. Using these linear regressions, we calculated velred (Equation 3) and plotted it in Fig 4 by using the range (1–6 mL/s).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup

Linear regressions for untreated and stented conditions for all aneurysm models

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

v̅e̅l̅sa for cases 1 and 8 before and after flow-diverter stent placement. Points were derived from CFD simulations, and the curves represent the linear regressions that were applied on each point set.

Fig 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 4.

A, velred as function of Q̅, where the gray region represents the most probable arterial flow range (3–5 mL/s). B, Mean and SD of velred per case. C, Mean and SD of velred per case but only considering the most probable arterial flow range. velred is presented as a percentage.

In general, velred decreased with an increasing arterial flow rate (Fig 4A). However in cases 8, 11, and 22 (footnoted in the Table), almost a constant reduction was observed. In those cases, ΔQmin was relatively small (mean = 0.024 mL/s, maximum ≤ 0.05 mL/s) compared with the rest of the cases (mean = 0.37 mL/s, minimum ≥ 0.18 mL/s). These results can also be visualized in Fig 4B, where the standard deviation of velred is presented for each case. When the most probable flow range is taken into account at 3–5 mL/s,17,18 the mean SD of velred was reduced from 3.6% (Fig 4B) to 0.48% (Fig 4C).

Discussion

In this study, the intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics were investigated before and after flow-diverter stent placement for different arterial flow rates in 25 aneurysm models. As was expected, v̅e̅l̅sa increases when the arterial flow rate goes up (Fig 3). However, the increment is linear and can be simply represented by 2 coefficients: m and Qmin. When the short-term flow-diverter stent performance is characterized by the relative reduction of the aneurysm flow velocity, velred (Equation 3), the flow-diverter stent was relatively “more effective” at lower flow rates than at higher ones (Fig 4). To better understand these findings, we performed the following analyses.

Linear Law

It was confirmed in untreated aneurysm models that the v̅e̅l̅sa linearly depends on Q̅ (R2 > 0.995),12 and this linear relationship was extended for stented aneurysms (R2 > 0.983). Indeed, from a hemodynamic point of view, a stented aneurysm is like another aneurysm with a particular resistance near the ostium (obtained by the stent), and this law is preserved. This relationship is very useful for characterizing aneurysm flow velocities because the influence of the arterial flow rate is included. Other variables such as wall shear stress or pressure can be also represented as functions of Q̅, but a quadratic relation seems to be more appropriate according to previous studies.12,24 These characterizations go beyond any hemodynamic assessment by using patient-specific measurements (either from CFD simulations or from image processing), because those evaluations are limited to flow conditions during recording, which change with time.

This linear law describes the intra-aneurysmal velocity at any flow rate in terms of the slope m and Qmin (both positive). If the endovascular device reduced the aneurysmal velocity, 2 changes were observed in these curves. First, the slope after treatment must be smaller than before (yet still positive), making rm < 1. This ratio is a direct indication that the blood flow speed is decreased after treatment, with the benefit of being independent of the arterial flow rate. For example, rm can be used to compare devices for a given aneurysm because it is related to the untreated condition, and a lower rm means that the implanted device will produce a higher velocity reduction inside the aneurysm. On the contrary, rm > 1 means that the treatment is actually increasing the velocity inside the aneurysm, which could be harmful and may increase the risk of rupture.

The slopes can also be used to compare cases because they quantify the hemodynamics of each aneurysm, independent of the arterial flow rate. For example, a standardized “critical slope” after flow diversion can be identified, in which aneurysm thrombosis would be expected. Nevertheless, further investigation is required to find this critical slope in a larger dataset with clinical follow-up information. Still, if these curves are used for this purpose or another one such as aneurysm rupture, then the specific arterial flow rate at which those aneurysms were evaluated becomes irrelevant because the flow rate is implicitly considered when using this approach.

The second change in the curves is that Qmin increases after stent placement; this change makes a positive ΔQmin (Qmin,s − Qmin,u). As discussed by Morales and Bonnefous,12 Qmin is given by the regressions and does not necessarily represent a physical phenomenon (zero velocity for a given nonzero flow rate), though it can be seen as the minimum arterial flow rate required to have a distinguishable flow motion inside the aneurysm cavity. Qmin increases after stent placement because the blood flow needs more energy (a higher Qmin) to overcome the additional hydraulic resistance produced by the flow-diverter stent and then to generate this distinguishable flow motion.

The validity of the linear model is only within the possible flow rate range studied here, which includes the most probable physiologic range. For flow rates between 0 and 1.0 mL/s, a quadratic model crossing the origin would be more appropriate. Nevertheless, the interest in such a low range is arguable because it will not be a physiologic condition and other phenomena, such as blood coagulation, may arise. Moreover, because the flow rate range covered here is based on the variability among patients,19 a shorter patient-specific flow range should be within this wide range without affecting the presented relationships for that patient.

Flow-Diverter Stent Performance and Arterial Flow Rate

In this study, the short-term flow-diverter stent performance was characterized by velred.

As presented in Equation 3 and confirmed in Fig 4, velred is higher when the arterial flow rate is low. This finding indicates that the arterial flow rate should be taken into account to fairly compare the performance of endovascular devices by any approach (in vivo, in vitro, or in silico). Using the same Reynolds number would not be fair for comparing the hemodynamics of 2 (or more) aneurysms because this number depends on the local arterial caliber; therefore, if 2 cases have the same number, the one with the higher arterial caliber will have a lower flow rate. This lower arterial flow rate benefits the device performance as shown in Fig 4A.

The weakening of the stent performance when increasing the arterial flow rate (and vice versa) is because the hydraulic resistance of the flow-diverter stent decreases when increasing the Reynolds number (proportional to the flow rate). This phenomenon is well-known in classic fluid mechanics and has been thoroughly studied for high-porosity stent placement in cerebral aneurysms.25

Previously, Larrabide et al26 performed CFD simulations by using an explicit representation of the flow-diverter stents to investigate the velocity variation during the cardiac cycle as a mean to quantify the device performances. They found that the pulsatility of the aneurysmal velocity increases after treatment. Similarly, Peach et al27 investigated the influence of several flow-diverter stent designs (different porosities and pore sizes) on hemodynamics, and the lowest flow reductions were seen at peak systole, when parent vessel flow is at its highest. These studies show that the stent performance is “weaker” at systole than at diastole (higher-versus-lower arterial flow rates); this finding is congruent with our findings when increasing the arterial flow rates.

Additionally, Mut et al9 varied the flow rate conditions before and after flow-diverter stent placement. It was found that a change in 30%–50% of the mean arterial flow could lead to a variation between 30% and 80% of some hemodynamic quantities. This is similar to the presentation in Fig 3—that is, variations of Q̅ do change v̅e̅l̅sa. Besides, the authors concluded that this variation can lead to misleading interpretations when clinical information is used, in particular, when pre- and posttreatment conditions are compared because flow conditions may vary among image acquisitions. The results presented here are in accordance with this statement, and the authors stress that caution is needed when comparing the 2 situations (either experimental or clinical) in which the arterial flow rates are known.

Flow Rate–Free Performance

The first condition that satisfies Equation 4 was not found in our study because it means flow cessation inside the aneurysm after treatment (ms = 0), which can be achieved after several months due to the formation of intrasaccular thrombus. The second condition was observed in 3 cases. There, ΔQmin was very small (≤0.05 mL/s) compared with the rest of the cases (minimum ≥ 0.018 mL/s).

The third condition that makes velred independent of Q̅ is the one derived from Equation 5. The largest variations in velred were observed at the lower end of the possible flow range, which are outside the most probable range at the ICA (gray region in Fig 4A). Nevertheless, further investigation is required in a larger population to see for which cases this assumption is plausible, by measuring the SD of velred, for example. A possible case stratification could be based on morphologic features such as aneurysm size and shape.

Potential Clinical Translation

Equation 5 is a plausible way to transfer these findings into clinical practice. However, this equation assumes that Q̅s = Q̅u = Q̅ and that Q̅ ≫ Qmin (for untreated and stented conditions).

To overcome the first limitation, (ie, Q̅s ≠ Q̅u), a more general expression should be used: Embedded Image Equation 6 states that velred can be obtained by knowing rm, the arterial flow rate before (Q̅u) and after treatment (Q̅s) and that those Q̅'s should be higher to neglect the influence of each Qmin. These quantities can be obtained from either CFD simulations or image analysis. For the latter, medical images can be processed by using optical flow techniques to retrieve both the arterial and aneurysm flows.14⇓–16

From a more generic perspective, this study reveals the importance of the arterial flow rate when evaluating aneurysm hemodynamics. As a consequence, qualitative evaluations such as the SMART scale or the grading of contrast flow speed should be avoided because no distinction can be made between variations in contrast due to either the implanted device or a reduction in the arterial flow rate. This advice is very important when comparing pre- and posttreatment angiograms of the same patient, but also when comparing among subjects. Additionally, this study proposes a simple quantification approach in which the arterial flow rate is considered to properly quantify aneurysm hemodynamics.

Limitations

Arterial walls were considered a rigid wall though it is known that the arteries are flexible structures and radial dilations occur due to pressure changes. Nevertheless, it is expected that main flow structures will be preserved.28 As in both numeric and experimental studies, the vascular morphology was not altered after flow-diverter stent placement. Indeed, the placement of a stent could locally change the artery shape. Unfortunately, it is not possible to overcome this limitation due to the lack of information regarding the mechanical properties of the artery and implanted devices, as well as the surrounding tissue and organs that could influence the final morphology after stent placement.

Conclusions

Spatiotemporal-averaged intra-aneurysmal velocity can be characterized by a linear function of the arterial flow rate before and after flow-diverter stent placement. This characterization provides a simple way to study intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics that goes beyond any patient-specific flow measurements. By using this linear relationship, it was found that the arterial flow rate affects the short-term flow-diverter stent performance. However, the device performance can be considered independent of the arterial flow rates within (and above) the physiologic flow range.

Acknowledgments

We thank the units of interventional neuroradiology of the Department of Medical Imaging and Information Sciences, University Hospitals of Geneva, Switzerland, and of Beaujon University Hospital, Clichy, France, for providing the medical images from which the vascular models were extracted.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Vitor Mendes Pereira—UNRELATED: Grant: Philips Healthcare,* Comments: grant to pay for a technician for 2 years for a related research project. Laurent Spelle—UNRELATED: Consulting Fee or Honorarium: Medtronic, Stryker, Sequent Medical. Jacques Moret—UNRELATED: Consultancy: Covidien, MicroVention, Stryker. Ignacio Larrabide—UNRELATED: Consultancy: Galgo Medical S. L.; Employment: CONICET and UNICEN; Patents (planned, pending or issued): WO 2015063352 A1. *Money paid to the institution.

References

  1. 1.↵
    1. Durso PI,
    2. Lanzino G,
    3. Cloft HJ, et al
    . Flow diversion for intracranial aneurysms: a review. Stroke 2011;42:2363–68 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.111.620328 pmid:21737793
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Pierot L
    . flow diverter stents in the treatment of intracranial aneurysms: where are we? J Neuroradiol 2011;38:40–46 doi:10.1016/j.neurad.2010.12.002 pmid:21257202
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Byrne JV,
    2. Beltechi R,
    3. Yarnold JA, et al
    . Early experience in the treatment of intra-cranial aneurysms by endovascular flow diversion: a multicentre prospective study. PLoS One 2010;5:1–8 doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012492 pmid:20824070
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Szikora I,
    2. Berentei Z,
    3. Kulcsar Z, et al
    . Treatment of intracranial aneurysms by functional reconstruction of the parent artery: the Budapest experience with the Pipeline embolization device. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:1139–47 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A2023 pmid:20150304
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Lylyk P,
    2. Miranda C,
    3. Ceratto R, et al
    . Curative endovascular reconstruction of cerebral aneurysms with the Pipeline embolization device: the Buenos Aires experience. Neurosurgery 2009;64:632–42; discussion 642–43; quiz N6 doi:10.1227/01.NEU.0000339109.98070.65 pmid:19349825
    CrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Grunwald IQ,
    2. Kamran M,
    3. Corkill RA, et al
    . Simple measurement of aneurysm residual after treatment: the SMART scale for evaluation of intracranial aneurysms treated with flow diverters. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2012;154:21–26; discussion 26 doi:10.1007/s00701-011-1177-0 pmid:22002552
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Ionita CN,
    2. Paciorek AM,
    3. Dohatcu A, et al
    . The asymmetric vascular stent efficacy in a rabbit aneurysm model. Stroke 2009;40:959–65 doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.108.524124 pmid:19131663
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  8. 8.↵
    1. Benz T,
    2. Kowarschik M,
    3. Endres J, et al
    . A Fourier-based approach to the angiographic assessment of flow diverter efficacy in the treatment of cerebral aneurysms. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2014;33:1788–802 doi:10.1109/TMI.2014.2320602 pmid:24801649
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Mut F,
    2. Ruijters D,
    3. Babic D, et al
    . Effects of changing physiologic conditions on the in vivo quantification of hemodynamic variables in cerebral aneurysms treated with flow diverting devices. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng 2014;30:135–42 doi:10.1002/cnm.2594 pmid:24039143
    CrossRefPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Morales HG,
    2. Bonnefous O
    . Peak systolic or maximum intra-aneurysmal hemodynamic condition? Implications on normalized flow variables. J Biomech 2014;47:2362–70 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2014.04.025 pmid:24861633
    CrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. Morales HG,
    2. Bonnefous O
    . Modeling hemodynamics after flow diverter with a porous medium. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging, Beijing, China. April 29 to May 2, 2014
  12. 12.↵
    1. Morales HG,
    2. Bonnefous O
    . Unraveling the relationship between arterial flow and intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics. J Biomech 2015;48:585–91 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2015.01.016 pmid:25638035
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Morales HG,
    2. Larrabide I,
    3. Geers AJ, et al
    . Newtonian and non-Newtonian blood flow in coiled cerebral aneurysms. J Biomech 2013;46:2158–64 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.06.034 pmid:23891312
    CrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Bonnefous O,
    2. Pereira VM,
    3. Ouared R, et al
    . Quantification of arterial flow using digital subtraction angiography. Med Phys 2012;39:6264–75 doi:10.1118/1.4754299 pmid:23039662
    CrossRefPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Pereira VM,
    2. Bonnefous O,
    3. Ouared R, et al
    . A DSA-based method using contrast-motion estimation for the assessment of the intra-aneurysmal flow changes induced by flow diverter stents. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2013;34:808–15 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3322 pmid:23124641
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  16. 16.↵
    1. Pereira VM,
    2. Ouared R,
    3. Brina O, et al
    . Quantification of internal carotid artery flow with digital subtraction angiography: validation of an optical flow approach with Doppler ultrasound. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:156–63 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3662 pmid:23928145
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  17. 17.↵
    1. Ford MD,
    2. Alperin N,
    3. Lee SH, et al
    . Characterization of volumetric flow rate waveforms in the normal internal carotid and vertebral arteries. Physiol Meas 2005;26:477–88 doi:10.1088/0967-3334/26/4/013 pmid:15886442
    CrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Hoi Y,
    2. Wasserman BA,
    3. Xie YJ, et al
    . Characterization of volumetric flow rate waveforms at the carotid bifurcations of older adults. Physiol Meas 2010;31:291–302 doi:10.1088/0967-3334/31/3/002 pmid:20086276
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. Cebral JR,
    2. Castro MA,
    3. Putman CM, et al
    . Flow-area relationship in internal carotid and vertebral arteries. Physiol Meas 2008;29:585–94 doi:10.1088/0967-3334/29/5/005 pmid:18460763
    CrossRefPubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Fernández MA,
    2. Gerbeau J,
    3. Martin V
    . Numerical simulation of blood flows through a porous interface. ESAIM: Mathematical Modelling and Numerical Analysis 2008;42:961–90 doi:10.1051/m2an:2008031
    CrossRef
  21. 21.↵
    1. Augsburger L,
    2. Reymond P,
    3. Rufenacht DA, et al
    . Intracranial stents being modeled as a porous medium: flow simulation in stented cerebral aneurysms. Ann Biomed Eng 2011;39:850–63 doi:10.1007/s10439-010-0200-6 pmid:21042856
    CrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Zhang Y,
    2. Chong W,
    3. Qian Y
    . Investigation of intracranial aneurysm hemodynamics following flow diverter stent treatment. Med Eng Phys 2013;35:608–15 doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2012.07.005 pmid:22884174
    CrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Levitt MR,
    2. McGah PM,
    3. Aliseda A, et al
    . Cerebral aneurysms treated with flow-diverting stents: computational models with intravascular blood flow measurements. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2014;35:143–48 doi:10.3174/ajnr.A3624 pmid:23868162
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  24. 24.↵
    1. Geers AJ,
    2. Larrabide I,
    3. Morales HG, et al
    . Approximating hemodynamics of cerebral aneurysms with steady flow simulations. J Biomech 2014;47:178–85 doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2013.09.033 pmid:24262847
    CrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Kim M,
    2. Taulbee DB,
    3. Tremmel M, et al
    . Comparison of two stents in modifying cerebral aneurysm hemodynamics. Ann Biomed Eng 2008;36:726–41 doi:10.1007/s10439-008-9449-4 pmid:18264766
    CrossRefPubMed
  26. 26.↵
    1. Larrabide I,
    2. Geers AJ,
    3. Morales HG, et al
    . Change in aneurysmal flow pulsatility after flow diverter treatment. Comput Med Imaging Graph 2016;50:2–8 doi:10.1016/j.compmedimag.2015.01.008 pmid:25704859
    CrossRefPubMed
  27. 27.↵
    1. Peach TW,
    2. Ngoepe M,
    3. Spranger K, et al
    . Personalizing flow diverter intervention for cerebral aneurysms: from computational hemodynamics to biochemical modeling. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng 2014;30:1387–407 doi:10.1002/cnm.2663 pmid:25045060
    CrossRefPubMed
  28. 28.↵
    1. Dempere-Marco L,
    2. Oubel E,
    3. Castro MA, et al
    . CFD analysis incorporating the influence of wall motion: application to intracranial aneurysms. Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv 2006;9(pt 2):438–45 pmid:17354802
    PubMed
  • Received November 19, 2015.
  • Accepted after revision July 20, 2016.
  • © 2016 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 37 (12)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 37, Issue 12
1 Dec 2016
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Does Arterial Flow Rate Affect the Assessment of Flow-Diverter Stent Performance?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
H.G. Morales, O. Bonnefous, A.J. Geers, O. Brina, V.M. Pereira, L. Spelle, J. Moret, I. Larrabide
Does Arterial Flow Rate Affect the Assessment of Flow-Diverter Stent Performance?
American Journal of Neuroradiology Dec 2016, 37 (12) 2293-2298; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4933

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
Does Arterial Flow Rate Affect the Assessment of Flow-Diverter Stent Performance?
H.G. Morales, O. Bonnefous, A.J. Geers, O. Brina, V.M. Pereira, L. Spelle, J. Moret, I. Larrabide
American Journal of Neuroradiology Dec 2016, 37 (12) 2293-2298; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A4933
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Implementation of computer simulation to assess flow diversion treatment outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis
  • Crossref (13)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • A review on the reliability of hemodynamic modeling in intracranial aneurysms: why computational fluid dynamics alone cannot solve the equation
    Philipp Berg, Sylvia Saalfeld, Samuel Voß, Oliver Beuing, Gábor Janiga
    Neurosurgical Focus 2019 47 1
  • Flow diversion for treatment of intracranial aneurysms: Mechanism and implications
    Melissa M. J. Chua, Luke Silveira, Justin Moore, Vitor M. Pereira, Ajith J. Thomas, Adam A. Dmytriw
    Annals of Neurology 2019 85 6
  • Implementation of computer simulation to assess flow diversion treatment outcomes: systematic review and meta-analysis
    Mingzi Zhang, Simon Tupin, Hitomi Anzai, Yutaro Kohata, Masaaki Shojima, Kosuke Suzuki, Yoshihiro Okamoto, Katsuhiro Tanaka, Takanobu Yagi, Soichiro Fujimura, Makoto Ohta
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2021 13 2
  • Software-based simulation for preprocedural assessment of braided stent sizing: a validation study
    Krishna Chaitanya Joshi, Ignacio Larrabide, Ahmed Saied, Nada Elsaid, Hector Fernandez, Demetrius K. Lopes
    Journal of Neurosurgery 2019 131 5
  • 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
    Michael C. Barbour, Fanette Chassagne, Venkat K. Chivukula, Nathanael Machicoane, Louis J. Kim, Michael R. Levitt, Alberto Aliseda
    Journal of Fluid Mechanics 2021 915
  • Population‐specific modelling of between/within‐subject flow variability in the carotid arteries of the elderly
    Toni Lassila, Ali Sarrami‐Foroushani, SeyedMostafa Hejazi, Alejandro F. Frangi
    International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering 2020 36 1
  • Numerical study of hemodynamics in brain aneurysms treated with flow diverter stents using porous medium theory
    Hooman Yadollahi-Farsani, Erik Scougal, Marcus Herrmann, Wei Wei, David Frakes, Brian Chong
    Computer Methods in Biomechanics and Biomedical Engineering 2019 22 11
  • Understanding of boundary conditions imposed at multiple outlets in computational haemodynamic analysis of cerebral aneurysm
    Kenjiro Shimano, Shota Serigano, Naoki Ikeda, Tomoki Yuchi, Suguru Shiratori, Hideaki Nagano
    Journal of Biorheology 2019 33 2
  • The impact of arterial flow complexity on flow diverter outcomes in aneurysms
    Kamil Jerzy Chodzyǹski, Pierrick Uzureau, Vincent Nuyens, Alexandre Rousseau, Gregory Coussement, Karim Zouaoui Boudjeltia
    Scientific Reports 2020 10 1
  • Entry remnants in flow-diverted aneurysms: Does branch geometry influence aneurysm closure?
    M Akli Zetchi, Adam A Dmytriw, Albert H Chiu, Brian J Drake, Niki V Alizadeh, Aditya Bharatha, Abhaya V Kulkarni, Thomas R Marotta
    Interventional Neuroradiology 2018 24 6

More in this TOC Section

  • SAVE vs. Solumbra Techniques for Thrombectomy
  • CT Perfusion&Reperfusion in Acute Ischemic Stroke
  • Delayed Reperfusion Post-Thrombectomy&Thrombolysis
Show more Interventional

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire