Ultrasound-Based Fluid-Structure Interaction Modeling of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Incorporating Pre-stress

Overview

Journal Front Physiol

Date 2021 Sep 6

PMID 34483971

Citations 7

Authors

Judith H C Fonken

Esther J Maas

Arjet H M Nievergeld

Marc R H M van Sambeek

Frans N van de Vosse

Richard G P Lopata

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Currently, the prediction of rupture risk in abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) solely relies on maximum diameter. However, wall mechanics and hemodynamics have shown to provide better risk indicators. Patient-specific fluid-structure interaction (FSI) simulations based on a non-invasive image modality are required to establish a patient-specific risk indicator. In this study, a robust framework to execute FSI simulations based on time-resolved three-dimensional ultrasound (3D+t US) data was obtained and employed on a data set of 30 AAA patients. Furthermore, the effect of including a pre-stress estimation (PSE) to obtain the stresses present in the measured geometry was evaluated. The established workflow uses the patient-specific 3D+t US-based segmentation and brachial blood pressure as input to generate meshes and boundary conditions for the FSI simulations. The 3D+t US-based FSI framework was successfully employed on an extensive set of AAA patient data. Omitting the pre-stress results in increased displacements, decreased wall stresses, and deviating time-averaged wall shear stress and oscillatory shear index patterns. These results underline the importance of incorporating pre-stress in FSI simulations. After validation, the presented framework provides an important tool for personalized modeling and longitudinal studies on AAA growth and rupture risk.

Citing Articles

New Trends of Personalized Medicine in the Management of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: A Review.

Alsabbagh Y, Erben Y, Vandenberg J, Farres H J Pers Med. 2024; 14(12).

PMID: 39728062 PMC: 11677056. DOI: 10.3390/jpm14121148.

Toward assessment of rupture risk predictors in abdominal aortic aneurysms including intraluminal thrombus based on 3D+t ultrasound images.

Nievergeld A, Fonken J, Maas E, Muller J, Thirugnanasambandam M, van Sambeek M APL Bioeng. 2024; 8(4):046105.

PMID: 39473482 PMC: 11521438. DOI: 10.1063/5.0200251.

On the Relative Effects of Wall and Intraluminal Thrombus Constitutive Material Properties in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Wall Stress.

Reyna V, Fathesami N, Wu W, Muluk S, De Oliveira V, Finol E Cardiovasc Eng Technol. 2024; 16(1):66-78.

PMID: 39466593 PMC: 11892800. DOI: 10.1007/s13239-024-00757-8.

On the feasibility of ultrasound Doppler-based personalized hemodynamic modeling of the abdominal aorta.

Fonken J, Gillissen M, van Engelen E, van Sambeek M, van de Vosse F, Lopata R Biomed Eng Online. 2024; 23(1):71.

PMID: 39054524 PMC: 11270776. DOI: 10.1186/s12938-024-01267-3.

Modeling Dynamics of the Cardiovascular System Using Fluid-Structure Interaction Methods.

Syed F, Khan S, Toma M Biology (Basel). 2023; 12(7).

PMID: 37508455 PMC: 10376821. DOI: 10.3390/biology12071026.

References

Scotti C, Jimenez J, Muluk S, Finol E . Wall stress and flow dynamics in abdominal aortic aneurysms: finite element analysis vs. fluid-structure interaction. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin. 2008; 11(3):301-22. DOI: 10.1080/10255840701827412. View

Les A, Shadden S, Figueroa C, Park J, Tedesco M, Herfkens R . Quantification of hemodynamics in abdominal aortic aneurysms during rest and exercise using magnetic resonance imaging and computational fluid dynamics. Ann Biomed Eng. 2010; 38(4):1288-313. PMC: 6203348. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-010-9949-x. View

Zambrano B, Gharahi H, Lim C, Jaberi F, Choi J, Lee W . Association of Intraluminal Thrombus, Hemodynamic Forces, and Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Expansion Using Longitudinal CT Images. Ann Biomed Eng. 2015; 44(5):1502-14. PMC: 4826625. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-015-1461-x. View

de Putter S, Wolters B, Rutten M, Breeuwer M, Gerritsen F, van de Vosse F . Patient-specific initial wall stress in abdominal aortic aneurysms with a backward incremental method. J Biomech. 2006; 40(5):1081-90. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.04.019. View

Fillinger M, Marra S, Raghavan M, Kennedy F . Prediction of rupture risk in abdominal aortic aneurysm during observation: wall stress versus diameter. J Vasc Surg. 2003; 37(4):724-32. DOI: 10.1067/mva.2003.213. View

Collin J . UK small aneurysms trial. Lancet. 1999; 353(9150):407-8; author reply 409. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)74979-5. View

Scotti C, Shkolnik A, Muluk S, Finol E . Fluid-structure interaction in abdominal aortic aneurysms: effects of asymmetry and wall thickness. Biomed Eng Online. 2005; 4:64. PMC: 1298313. DOI: 10.1186/1475-925X-4-64. View

Biasetti J, Gasser T, Auer M, Hedin U, Labruto F . Hemodynamics of the normal aorta compared to fusiform and saccular abdominal aortic aneurysms with emphasis on a potential thrombus formation mechanism. Ann Biomed Eng. 2009; 38(2):380-90. DOI: 10.1007/s10439-009-9843-6. View

Di Martino E, Guadagni G, Fumero A, Ballerini G, Spirito R, Biglioli P . Fluid-structure interaction within realistic three-dimensional models of the aneurysmatic aorta as a guidance to assess the risk of rupture of the aneurysm. Med Eng Phys. 2002; 23(9):647-55. DOI: 10.1016/s1350-4533(01)00093-5. View

10.

de Ruijter J, van Sambeek M, van de Vosse F, Lopata R . Automated 3D geometry segmentation of the healthy and diseased carotid artery in free-hand, probe tracked ultrasound images. Med Phys. 2019; 47(3):1034-1047. PMC: 7079173. DOI: 10.1002/mp.13960. View

11.

Cheng C, Herfkens R, Taylor C . Comparison of abdominal aortic hemodynamics between men and women at rest and during lower limb exercise. J Vasc Surg. 2003; 37(1):118-23. DOI: 10.1067/mva.2002.107. View

12.

Rissland P, Alemu Y, Einav S, Ricotta J, Bluestein D . Abdominal aortic aneurysm risk of rupture: patient-specific FSI simulations using anisotropic model. J Biomech Eng. 2009; 131(3):031001. DOI: 10.1115/1.3005200. View

13.

Wolters B, Rutten M, Schurink G, Kose U, de Hart J, van de Vosse F . A patient-specific computational model of fluid-structure interaction in abdominal aortic aneurysms. Med Eng Phys. 2005; 27(10):871-83. DOI: 10.1016/j.medengphy.2005.06.008. View

14.

Vorp D . Biomechanics of abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Biomech. 2007; 40(9):1887-902. PMC: 2692528. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2006.09.003. View

15.

Guerrero J, Salcudean S, McEwen J, Masri B, Nicolaou S . Real-time vessel segmentation and tracking for ultrasound imaging applications. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2007; 26(8):1079-90. DOI: 10.1109/TMI.2007.899180. View

16.

Chaikof E, Dalman R, Eskandari M, Jackson B, Lee W, Mansour M . The Society for Vascular Surgery practice guidelines on the care of patients with an abdominal aortic aneurysm. J Vasc Surg. 2017; 67(1):2-77.e2. DOI: 10.1016/j.jvs.2017.10.044. View

17.

Salman H, Ramazanli B, Yavuz M, Yalcin H . Biomechanical Investigation of Disturbed Hemodynamics-Induced Tissue Degeneration in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Using Computational and Experimental Techniques. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2019; 7:111. PMC: 6555197. DOI: 10.3389/fbioe.2019.00111. View

18.

van Disseldorp E, Hobelman K, Petterson N, van de Vosse F, van Sambeek M, Lopata R . Influence of limited field-of-view on wall stress analysis in abdominal aortic aneurysms. J Biomech. 2016; 49(12):2405-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.01.020. View

19.

van Disseldorp E, Petterson N, van de Vosse F, van Sambeek M, Lopata R . Quantification of aortic stiffness and wall stress in healthy volunteers and abdominal aortic aneurysm patients using time-resolved 3D ultrasound: a comparison study. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018; 20(2):185-191. DOI: 10.1093/ehjci/jey051. View

20.

van Disseldorp E, Petterson N, Rutten M, van de Vosse F, van Sambeek M, Lopata R . Patient Specific Wall Stress Analysis and Mechanical Characterization of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Using 4D Ultrasound. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2016; 52(5):635-642. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejvs.2016.07.088. View