4.5 Article

Intracranial Aneurysmal Pulsatility as a New Individual Criterion for Rupture Risk Evaluation: Biomechanical and Numeric Approach (IRRAs Project)

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY
卷 35, 期 9, 页码 1765-1771

出版社

AMER SOC NEURORADIOLOGY
DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3949

关键词

-

资金

  1. Philips Healthcare Inc
  2. labex NUMEV

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The present study follows an experimental work based on the characterization of the biomechanical behavior of the aneurysmal wall and a numerical study where a significant difference in term of volume variation between ruptured and unruptured aneurysm was observed in a specific case. Our study was designed to highlight by means of numeric simulations the correlation between aneurysm sac pulsatility and the risk of rupture through the mechanical properties of the wall. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In accordance with previous work suggesting a correlation between the risk of rupture and the material properties of cerebral aneurysms, 12 fluid-structure interaction computations were performed on 12 patient-specific cases, corresponding to typical shapes and locations of cerebral aneurysms. The variations of the aneurysmal volume during the cardiac cycle (AV) are compared by using wall material characteristics of either degraded or nondegraded tissues. RESULTS: Aneurysms were located on 6 different arteries: middle cerebral artery (4), anterior cerebral artery (3), internal carotid artery (1), vertebral artery (1), ophthalmic artery (1), and basilar artery (1). Aneurysms presented different shapes (uniform or multilobulated) and diastolic volumes (from 18 to 392 mm(3)). The pulsatility (Delta V/V) was significantly larger for a soft aneurysmal material (average of 26%) than for a stiff material (average of 4%). The difference between Delta V, for each condition, was statistically significant: P =.005. CONCLUSIONS: The difference in aneurysmal pulsatility as highlighted in this work might be a relevant patient-specific predictor of aneurysm risk of rupture.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据