An In Vitro Study of Pulsatile Fluid Dynamics in Intracranial Aneurysm Models Treated with Embolic Coils and Flow Diverters

被引:16
作者
Babiker, M. Haithem [1 ]
Gonzalez, L. Fernando [2 ]
Albuquerque, Felipe [3 ]
Collins, Daniel [4 ]
Elvikis, Arius [4 ]
Zwart, Christine [1 ]
Roszelle, Breigh [1 ]
Frakes, David H. [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Arizona State Univ, Sch Biol & Hlth Syst Engn, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
[2] Thomas Jefferson Univ, Dept Neurol Surg, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
[3] St Josephs Hosp, Barrow Neurol Inst, Phoenix, AZ 85013 USA
[4] Arizona State Univ, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
[5] Arizona State Univ, Sch Elect Comp & Energy Engn, Tempe, AZ 85287 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Basilar artery; embolic coils; flow diverter; intracranial aneurysm (ICA); packing density; PIV; pulsatile flow; GUGLIELMI DETACHABLE COILS; PACKING DENSITY; SUBARACHNOID HEMORRHAGE; CEREBRAL ANEURYSMS; NEUROFORM STENT; PLATINUM COILS; PARENT VESSEL; BLOOD-FLOW; HEMODYNAMICS; EMBOLIZATION;
D O I
10.1109/TBME.2012.2228002
中图分类号
R318 [生物医学工程];
学科分类号
0831 ;
摘要
Although coil embolization is one of the most effective treatments for intracranial aneurysms (ICAs), the procedure is often unsuccessful. For example, an ICA may persist after coil embolization if deployed coils fail to block the flow of blood into the aneurysm. Unfortunately, the specific flow changes that are effected by embolic coiling (and other endovascular therapies) are poorly understood, which creates a barrier to the design and execution of optimal treatments in the clinic. We present an in vitro pulsatile flow study of treated basilar tip aneurysm models that elucidates relationships between controllable treatment parameters and clinically important post-treatment fluid dynamics. We also compare fluid dynamic performance across embolic coils and more recently proposed devices (e. g., the Pipeline Embolization Device) that focus on treating ICAs by diverting rather than blocking blood flow. In agreement with previous steady flow studies, coil embolization-reduced velocity magnitude at the aneurysmal neck by greater percentages for a narrow-neck aneurysm, and reduced flow into aneurysms by greater percentages at lower parent vessel flow rates. However, flow diversion reduced flow into a wide-neck aneurysm more so than coil embolization, regardless of flow conditions. Finally, results also showed that for the endovascular devices we examined, treatment effects were generally less dramatic under physiologic pulsatile flow conditions as compared to steady flow conditions. The fluid dynamic performance data presented in this study represent the first direct in vitro comparison of coils and flow diverters in aneurysm models, and provide a novel, quantitative basis to aid in designing endovascular treatments toward specific fluid dynamic outcomes.
引用
收藏
页码:1150 / 1159
页数:10
相关论文
共 54 条
[1]  
Augsburger L, 2009, CLIN NEURORADIOL, V19, P204, DOI 10.1007/s00062-009-9005-0
[2]  
Babiker M. H., 2012, P INT STROK C MAY
[3]   Quantitative Effects of Coil Packing Density on Cerebral Aneurysm Fluid Dynamics: An In Vitro Steady Flow Study [J].
Babiker, M. Haithem ;
Gonzalez, L. Fernando ;
Albuquerque, Felipe ;
Collins, Daniel ;
Elvikis, Arius ;
Frakes, David H. .
ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, 2010, 38 (07) :2293-2301
[4]  
Boecher-Schwarz HG, 2000, AM J NEURORADIOL, V21, P1532
[5]   Medical progress: Cerebral aneurysms [J].
Brisman, Jonathan L. ;
Song, Joon K. ;
Newell, David W. .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 2006, 355 (09) :928-939
[6]  
Britz G. W., 2006, J NEUROSURG PEDIAT, V104
[7]   INTRACEREBRAL HEMORRHAGE MORE THAN TWICE AS COMMON AS SUBARACHNOID HEMORRHAGE [J].
BRODERICK, JP ;
BROTT, T ;
TOMSICK, T ;
MILLER, R ;
HUSTER, G .
JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGERY, 1993, 78 (02) :188-191
[8]   CFD modeling of blood flow following coil embolization of aneurysms [J].
Byun, HS ;
Rhee, K .
MEDICAL ENGINEERING & PHYSICS, 2004, 26 (09) :755-761
[9]  
Cantón G, 2005, AM J NEURORADIOL, V26, P904
[10]   Association of Hemodynamic Characteristics and Cerebral Aneurysm Rupture [J].
Cebral, J. R. ;
Mut, F. ;
Weir, J. ;
Putman, C. M. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, 2011, 32 (02) :264-270