Back

Improving Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulations of Coiled Aneurysms Using Finite Element Modeling

Fillingham, P.; Romero Bhathal, J.; Marsh, L. M.; Barbour, M. C.; Kurt, M.; Ionita, C. N.; Davies, J. M.; Aliseda, A.; Levitt, M. R.

2023-03-01 cardiovascular medicine
10.1101/2023.02.27.23286512
Show abstract

Cerebral aneurysms are a serious clinical challenge, with [~]half resulting in death or disability. Treatment via endovascular coiling significantly reduces the chances of rupture, but the technique has failure rates between 25-40%. This presents a pressing need to develop a method for determining optimal coil deployment strategies. Quantification of aneurysm hemodynamics through computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has the potential to significantly improve the understanding of the mechanics of aneurysm coiling and improve treatment outcomes, but accurately representing the coil mass in CFD simulations remains a challenge. We have used the Finite Element Method (FEM) for simulating patient-specific coil deployment based on mechanical properties and coil geometries provided by the device manufacturer for n=4 ICA aneurysms for which 3D printed in vitro models were also generated, coiled, and scanned using ultra-high resolution synchrotron micro-CT. The physical and virtual coil geometries were voxelized onto a binary structured grid and porosity maps were generated for geometric comparison. The average binary accuracy score is 0.836 and the average error in porosity map is 6.3%. We then conduct patient-specific CFD simulations of the aneurysm hemodynamics using virtual coils geometries, micro-CT generated oil geometries, and using the porous medium method to represent the coil mass. Hemodynamic parameters of interest including were calculated for each of the CFD simulations. The average error across hemodynamic parameters of interest is [~]19%, a 58% reduction from the average error of the porous media simulations, demonstrating a marked improvement in the accuracy of CFD simulations using FEM generated coil geometries.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Scientific Reports
based on 701 papers
Top 11%
11.5%
2
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
based on 12 papers
Top 0.1%
11.4%
3
PLOS ONE
based on 1737 papers
Top 62%
6.5%
4
Frontiers in Neurology
based on 74 papers
Top 3%
6.0%
5
Computers in Biology and Medicine
based on 39 papers
Top 0.7%
6.0%
6
Journal of the American Heart Association
based on 92 papers
Top 5%
5.4%
7
Frontiers in Physiology
based on 18 papers
Top 0.6%
2.9%
8
The American Journal of Cardiology
based on 15 papers
Top 2%
2.9%
50% of probability mass above
9
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
based on 33 papers
Top 4%
2.6%
10
Radiotherapy and Oncology
based on 11 papers
Top 0.8%
2.5%
11
Cureus
based on 64 papers
Top 7%
2.5%
12
Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology
based on 11 papers
Top 1%
1.6%
13
Hypertension
based on 20 papers
Top 2%
1.6%
14
Circulation
based on 37 papers
Top 4%
1.6%
15
Journal of Thrombosis and Haemostasis
based on 10 papers
Top 0.8%
1.6%
16
Brain and Behavior
based on 19 papers
Top 3%
1.4%
17
Biomedicines
based on 21 papers
Top 2%
1.4%
18
PeerJ
based on 46 papers
Top 6%
1.4%
19
Heart Rhythm
based on 16 papers
Top 2%
1.4%
20
Clinical Cancer Research
based on 22 papers
Top 3%
1.4%
21
Journal of Clinical Medicine
based on 77 papers
Top 13%
1.2%
22
eLife
based on 262 papers
Top 28%
0.8%
23
PLOS Global Public Health
based on 287 papers
Top 20%
0.8%
24
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
based on 166 papers
Top 11%
0.8%
25
IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics
based on 14 papers
Top 3%
0.7%
26
European Heart Journal - Digital Health
based on 15 papers
Top 4%
0.7%
27
Atherosclerosis
based on 16 papers
Top 4%
0.7%
28
Biosensors and Bioelectronics
based on 13 papers
Top 1%
0.7%
29
International Journal of Cardiology
based on 13 papers
Top 4%
0.7%