4.5 Article

The Role of Circle of Willis Anatomy Variations in Cardio-embolic Stroke: A Patient-Specific Simulation Based Study

Journal

ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
Volume 46, Issue 8, Pages 1128-1145

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-018-2027-5

Keywords

Stroke; Embolus; Hemodynamics; Circle of Willis; Fluid-particle interaction

Funding

  1. American Heart Association Award [13GRNT17070095]
  2. Regent's and Chancellor's Research Fellowship at U.C. Berkeley

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We describe a patient-specific simulation based investigation on the role of Circle of Willis anatomy in cardioembolic stroke. Our simulation framework consists of medical image-driven modeling of patient anatomy including the Circle, 3D blood flow simulation through patient vasculature, embolus transport modeling using a discrete particle dynamics technique, and a sampling based approach to incorporate parametric variations. A total of 24 (four patients and six Circle anatomies including the complete Circle) models were considered, with cardiogenic emboli of varying sizes and compositions released virtually and tracked to compute distribution to the brain. The results establish that Circle anatomical variations significantly influence embolus distribution to the six major cerebral arteries. Embolus distribution to MCA territory is found to be least sensitive to the influence of anatomical variations. For varying Circle topologies, differences in flow through cervical vasculature are observed. This incoming flow is recruited differently across the communicating arteries of the Circle for varying anastomoses. Emboli interact with the routed flow, and can undergo significant traversal across the Circle arterial segments, depending upon their inertia and density ratio with respect to blood. This interaction drives the underlying biomechanics of embolus transport across the Circle, explaining how Circle anatomy influences embolism risk.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available