4.2 Article

Microbubble expansion in a flexible tube

Journal

Publisher

ASME
DOI: 10.1115/1.2206200

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [EB003541] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We have utilized a computational model of the expansion of a microbubble in a liquid-filled flexible tube to investigate the potential for acoustic vaporization of perfluorocarbon droplets to damage blood vessels during a novel gas embolotherapy technique for the potential treatment of tumors. This model uses a fixed grid, multi-domain, interface tracking, direct numerical simulation method that treats all interfaces and boundaries as sharp discontinuities for high accuracy. In the current work, we examined effects of initial bubble size on the flows and wall stresses that result from droplet vaporization. The remaining dimensionless parameters that govern the system response (Reynolds, Weber, and Strouhal numbers, initial bubble pressure, and wall stiffness and tension) were selected to model an arteriole. The results for a flexible tube are significantly different from those for a rigid tube. Two major flow regimes occur due to the combined effect of bubble and tube deformation: inflow at the tube ends and outflow near the bubble surface. The flexibility of the tube largely dissipates the extreme pressure that develops in the rigid tube model. Both the magnitude and the overall expansion time of the rapidly changing pressure are greatly reduced in the flexible tube. Smaller initial bubble diameters, relative to the vessel diameter result in lower wall stresses. This study indicates that wall flexibility can significantly influence the wall stresses that result from acoustic vaporization of intravascular perfluorocarbon droplets, and suggests that acoustic activation of droplets in larger more flexible vessels may be less likely to damage or rupture vessels than activation in smaller and stiffer vessels.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available