Non-Newtonian Endothelial Shear Stress Simulation: Does It Matter?
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Patient-specific coronary endothelial shear stress (ESS) calculations using Newtonian and non-Newtonian rheological models were performed to assess whether the common assumption of Newtonian blood behavior offers similar results to a more realistic but computationally expensive non-Newtonian model. 16 coronary arteries (from 16 patients) were reconstructed from optical coherence tomographic (OCT) imaging. Pulsatile CFD simulations using Newtonian and the Quemada non-Newtonian model were performed. Endothelial shear stress (ESS) and other indices were compared. Exploratory indices including local blood viscosity (LBV) were calculated from non-Newtonian simulation data. Compared to the Newtonian results, the non-Newtonian model estimates significantly higher time-averaged ESS (1.69 (IQR 1.36)Pa versus 1.28 (1.16)Pa, < 0.001) and ESS gradient (0.90 (1.20)Pa/mm versus 0.74 (1.03)Pa/mm, < 0.001) throughout the cardiac cycle, under-estimating the low ESS (<1Pa) area (37.20 ± 13.57% versus 50.43 ± 14.16%, 95% CI 11.28-15.18, < 0.001). Similar results were also found in the idealized artery simulations with non-Newtonian median ESS being higher than the Newtonian median ESS (healthy segments: 0.8238Pa versus 0.6618Pa, < 0.001 proximal; 0.8179Pa versus 0.6610Pa, < 0.001 distal; stenotic segments: 0.8196Pa versus 0.6611Pa, < 0.001 proximal; 0.2546Pa versus 0.2245Pa, < 0.001 distal) On average, the non-Newtonian model has a LBV of 1.45 times above the Newtonian model with an average peak LBV of 40-fold. Non-Newtonian blood model estimates higher quantitative ESS values than the Newtonian model. Incorporation of non-Newtonian blood behavior may improve the accuracy of ESS measurements. The non-Newtonian model also allows calculation of exploratory viscosity-based hemodynamic indices, such as local blood viscosity, which may offer additional information to detect underlying atherosclerosis.
Ekmejian A, Carpenter H, Ciofani J, Gray B, Allahwala U, Ward M J Am Heart Assoc. 2024; 13(19):e037129.
PMID: 39291505 PMC: 11681461. DOI: 10.1161/JAHA.124.037129.
Left main coronary artery morphological phenotypes and its hemodynamic properties.
Wang Q, Ouyang H, Lv L, Gui L, Yang S, Hua P Biomed Eng Online. 2024; 23(1):9.
PMID: 38254133 PMC: 10804578. DOI: 10.1186/s12938-024-01205-3.
Stark A, Giannopoulos A, Pugachev A, Shiri I, Haeberlin A, Raber L J Cardiovasc Dev Dis. 2023; 10(9).
PMID: 37754814 PMC: 10532130. DOI: 10.3390/jcdd10090384.
Poon E, Wu X, Dijkstra J, OLeary N, Torii R, Reiber J Int J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2023; 39(10):1953-1961.
PMID: 37733283 DOI: 10.1007/s10554-023-02949-0.
De Lazzari B, Capoccia M, Cheshire N, Rosendahl U, Badagliacca R, De Lazzari C Bioengineering (Basel). 2023; 10(1).
PMID: 36671632 PMC: 9854437. DOI: 10.3390/bioengineering10010060.