4.5 Article

Flow field and oscillatory shear stress in a tuning-fork-shaped model of the average human carotid bifurcation

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOMECHANICS
卷 34, 期 12, 页码 1555-1562

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0021-9290(01)00148-8

关键词

atherosclerosis; carotid bifurcation; experimental modeling; flow visualization; LDA flow measurement; wall shear stress

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The oscillatory shear index (OSI) was developed based on the hypothesis that intimal hyperplasia was correlated with oscillatory shear stresses. However, the validity of the OSI was in question since the correlation between intimal thickness and the OSI at the side walls of the sinus in the Y-shaped model of the average human carotid bifurcation (Y-AHCB) was weak. The objectives of this paper are to examine whether the reason for the weak correlation ties in the deviation in geometry of Y-AHCB from real human carotid bifurcation, and whether this correlation is clearly improved in the tuning-fork-shaped model of the average human carotid bifurcation (TF-AHCB). The geometry of the TF-AHCB model was based on observation and statistical analysis of specimens from 74 cadavers. The flow fields in both models were studied and compared by using flow visualization methods under steady flow conditions and by using laser Doppler anemometer (LDA) under pulsatile flow conditions. The TF-shaped geometry leads to a more complex flow field than the Y-shaped geometry. This added complexity includes strengthened helical movements in the sinus, new flow separation zone, and directional changes in the secondary flow patterns. The results show that the OSI-values at the side walls of the sinus in the TF-shaped model were more than two times as large as those in the Y-shaped model. This study confirmed the stronger correlation between the OSI and intimal thickness in the tuning-fork geometry of human carotid bifurcation, and the TF-AHCB model is a significant improvement over the traditional Y-shaped model. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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