Reproducibility of image-based computational models of intracranial aneurysm: a comparison between 3D rotational angiography, CT angiography and MR angiography

Yuan Ren, Guo-Zhong Chen, Zhen Liu, Yan Cai, Guang-Ming Lu, Zhi-Yong Li, Yuan Ren, Guo-Zhong Chen, Zhen Liu, Yan Cai, Guang-Ming Lu, Zhi-Yong Li

Abstract

Background: Reconstruction of patient-specific biomechanical model of intracranial aneurysm has been based on different imaging modalities. However, different imaging techniques may influence the model geometry and the computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulation. The aim of this study is to evaluate the differences of the morphological and hemodynamic parameters in the computational models reconstructed from computed tomography angiography (CTA), magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) and 3D rotational angiography (3DRA).

Methods: Ten patients with cerebral aneurysms were enrolled in the study. MRA, CTA and 3DRA were performed on all patients. For each patient, three patient-specific models were reconstructed respectively based on the three sets of imaging data of the patient. CFD simulations were performed on each model. Model geometry and hemodynamic parameters were compared between the three models.

Results: In terms of morphological parameters, by comparing CTA based models (CM) and 3DRA based models (DM) which were treated as the "standard models", the aspect ratio had the minimum difference (Δ = 8.3 ± 1.72 %, P = 0.953) and the surface distance was 0.25 ± 0.07 mm. Meanwhile, by comparing MRA based models (MM) and DM, the size had the minimum difference (Δ = 6.6 ± 1.85 %, P = 0.683) and the surface distance was 0.36 ± 0.1 mm. In respect of hemodynamic parameters, all three models showed a similar distribution: low average WSS at the sack, high OSI at the body and high average WSSG at the neck. However, there was a large variation in the average WSS (Δ = 34 ± 5.13 % for CM, Δ = 40.6 ± 9.21 % for MM).

Conclusion: CTA and MRA have no significant differences in reproducing intracranial aneurysm geometry. The CFD results suggests there might be some significant differences in hemodynamic parameters between the three imaging-based models and this needs to be considered when interpreting the CFD results of different imaging-based models. If we only need to study the main flow patterns, three types of image-based model might be all suitable for patient-specific computational modeling studies.

Keywords: Aneurysm; Angiography; CFD; CTA; DSA; MRA; Reproducibility.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Model reconstruction of patient-specific model. a A original image data, b a rough model by using the threshold segmentation and artificially adjusting, c the final model after surface smoothing, d showing different areas in the model. Arrows represent the aneurysm
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The illustration of the morphological parameters. a Definition of size and AR, b definition of AA and SR
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Differences distribution for morphologic parameters. a Difference between CM and MM, b difference between MM and DM
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Surface distance distribution of a cerebral aneurysm located in ICA
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Surface distance data (mean and standard deviation) of the patients
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
The distribution of AWSS, OSI and AWSSG in the three image based models (DM, CM and MM)
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Differences distribution for hemodynamic parameters. a Difference between CM and DM, b difference between MM and DM
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Velocity-colored streamline at the peak systole of two aneurysms located on ACA-A1 (top row) and ACoA (bottom row). Models based on different imaging techniques were present from left to right (DM, CM and MM).The black arrow shows the flow direction

References

    1. Schievink WI. Intracranial aneurysms. N Engl J Med. 1997;336(1):28–40. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199701023360106.
    1. Hashimoto T, Meng H, Young WL. Intracranial aneurysms: links among inflammation, hemodynamics and vascular remodeling. Neurol Res. 2006;28(4):372–380. doi: 10.1179/016164106X14973.
    1. Ho A, Lin N, Charoenvimolphan N, Stanley M, Frerichs KU, Day AL, Du R. Morphological parameters associated with ruptured posterior communicating aneurysms. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(4):e94837. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0094837.
    1. Kaspera W, Ladzinski P, Larysz P, Hebda A, Ptaszkiewicz K, Kopera M, Larysz D. Morphological, hemodynamic, and clinical independent risk factors for anterior communicating artery aneurysms. Stroke. 2014;45(10):2906–2911. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.114.006055.
    1. Sforza DM, Putman CM, Cebral JR. Hemodynamics of cerebral aneurysms. Annu Rev Fluid Mech. 2009;41:91–107. doi: 10.1146/annurev.fluid.40.111406.102126.
    1. Weir B, Disney L, Karrison T. Sizes of ruptured and unruptured aneurysms in relation to their sites and the ages of patients. J Neurosurg. 2002;96(1):64–70. doi: 10.3171/jns.2002.96.1.0064.
    1. Luscher TF, Tanner FC. Endothelial regulation of vascular tone and growth. Am J Hypertens. 1993;6(7 Pt 2):283S–293S.
    1. Cebral JR, Castro MA, Burgess JE, Pergolizzi RS, Sheridan MJ, Putman CM. Characterization of cerebral aneurysms for assessing risk of rupture by using patient-specific computational hemodynamics models. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26(10):2550–2559.
    1. Cebral JR, Hendrickson S, Putman CM. Hemodynamics in a lethal basilar artery aneurysm just before its rupture. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009;30(1):95–98. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A1312.
    1. Cha KS, Balaras E, Lieber BB, Sadasivan C, Wakhloo AK. Modeling the interaction of coils with the local blood flow after coil embolization of intracranial aneurysms. J Biomech Eng. 2007;129(6):873–879. doi: 10.1115/1.2800773.
    1. Kakalis NM, Mitsos AP, Byrne JV, Ventikos Y. The haemodynamics of endovascular aneurysm treatment: a computational modelling approach for estimating the influence of multiple coil deployment. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2008;27(6):814–824. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2008.915549.
    1. van Rooij WJ, Sprengers ME, de Gast AN, Peluso JP, Sluzewski M. 3D rotational angiography: the new gold standard in the detection of additional intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29(5):976–979. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A0964.
    1. Hernandez M, Frangi AF. Non-parametric geodesic active regions: method and evaluation for cerebral aneurysms segmentation in 3DRA and CTA. Med Image Anal. 2007;11(3):224–241. doi: 10.1016/j.media.2007.01.002.
    1. Sugahara T, Korogi Y, Nakashima K, Hamatake S, Honda S, Takahashi M. Comparison of 2D and 3D digital subtraction angiography in evaluation of intracranial aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2002;23(9):1545–1552.
    1. Schneiders JJ, Marquering HA, Antiga L, van den Berg R, VanBavel E, Majoie CB. Intracranial aneurysm neck size overestimation with 3D rotational angiography: the impact on intra-aneurysmal hemodynamics simulated with computational fluid dynamics. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013;34(1):121–128. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A3179.
    1. Hoi Y, Meng H, Woodward SH, Bendok BR, Hanel RA, Guterman LR, Hopkins LN. Effects of arterial geometry on aneurysm growth: three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics study. J Neurosurg. 2004;101(4):676–681. doi: 10.3171/jns.2004.101.4.0676.
    1. Goubergrits L, Schaller J, Kertzscher U, Petz C, Hege HC, Spuler A. Reproducibility of image-based analysis of cerebral aneurysm geometry and hemodynamics: an in-vitro study of magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, and three-dimensional rotational angiography. J Neurol Surg A Cent Eur Neurosurg. 2013;74(5):294–302. doi: 10.1055/s-0033-1342937.
    1. Cebral JR, Castro MA, Appanaboyina S, Putman CM, Millan D, Frangi AF. Efficient pipeline for image-based patient-specific analysis of cerebral aneurysm hemodynamics: technique and sensitivity. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2005;24(4):457–467. doi: 10.1109/TMI.2005.844159.
    1. Zhao M, Amin-Hanjani S, Ruland S, Curcio AP, Ostergren L, Charbel FT. Regional cerebral blood flow using quantitative MR angiography. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2007;28(8):1470–1473. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A0582.
    1. Jing F, Per O. Intracerebral regional distribution of blood flow in response to uterine contractions in growth-restricted human fetuses. Early Hum Dev. 2007;83(9):607–612. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2007.01.011.
    1. Raghavan ML, Ma B, Harbaugh RE. Quantified aneurysm shape and rupture risk. J Neurosurg. 2005;102(2):355–362. doi: 10.3171/jns.2005.102.2.0355.
    1. Ujiie H, Tachibana H, Hiramatsu O, Hazel AL, Matsumoto T, Ogasawara Y, Nakajima H, Hori T, Takakura K, Kajiya F. Effects of size and shape (aspect ratio) on the hemodynamics of saccular aneurysms: a possible index for surgical treatment of intracranial aneurysms. Neurosurgery. 1999;45(1):119–129. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199907000-00028.
    1. Ujiie H, Tamano Y, Sasaki K, Hori T. Is the aspect ratio a reliable index for predicting the rupture of a saccular aneurysm? Neurosurgery. 2001;48(3):495–502. doi: 10.1097/00006123-200103000-00007.
    1. Dhar S, Tremmel M, Mocco J, Kim M, Yamamoto J, Siddiqui AH, Hopkins LN, Meng H. Morphology parameters for intracranial aneurysm rupture risk assessment. Neurosurgery. 2008;63(2):185–196. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000316847.64140.81.
    1. Jou LD, Lee DH, Morsi H, Mawad ME. Wall shear stress on ruptured and unruptured intracranial aneurysms at the internal carotid artery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2008;29(9):1761–1767. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A1180.
    1. Castro M, Putman C, Radaelli A, Frangi A, Cebral J. Hemodynamics and rupture of terminal cerebral aneurysms. Academ Radiol. 2009;16(10):1201–1207. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2009.03.022.
    1. Geers AJ, Larrabide I, Radaelli AG, Bogunovic H, Kim M, Gratama van Andel HA, Majoie CB, VanBavel E, Frangi AF. Patient-specific computational hemodynamics of intracranial aneurysms from 3D rotational angiography and CT angiography: an in vivo reproducibility study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2011;32(3):581–586. doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A2306.
    1. He X, Ku DN. Pulsatile flow in the human left coronary artery bifurcation: average conditions. J Biomech Eng. 1996;118(1):74–82. doi: 10.1115/1.2795948.
    1. Majoie CB, Sprengers ME, van Rooij WJ, Lavini C, Sluzewski M, van Rijn JC, den Heeten GJ. MR angiography at 3T versus digital subtraction angiography in the follow-up of intracranial aneurysms treated with detachable coils. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2005;26(6):1349–1356.
    1. Nijenhuis RJ, Jacobs MJ, Jaspers K, Reinders M, van Engelshoven JM, Leiner T, Backes WH. Comparison of magnetic resonance with computed tomography angiography for preoperative localization of the Adamkiewicz artery in thoracoabdominal aortic aneurysm patients. J Vasc Surg. 2007;45(4):677–685. doi: 10.1016/j.jvs.2006.11.046.
    1. Ernemann UU, Gronewaller E, Duffner FB, Guervit O, Claassen J, Skalej MD. Influence of geometric and hemodynamic parameters on aneurysm visualization during three-dimensional rotational angiography: an in vitro study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24(4):597–603.
    1. Piotin M, Gailloud P, Bidaut L, Mandai S, Muster M, Moret J, Rufenacht DA. CT angiography, MR angiography and rotational digital subtraction angiography for volumetric assessment of intracranial aneurysms. An experimental study. Neuroradiology. 2003;45(6):404–409. doi: 10.1007/s00234-002-0922-8.
    1. Brisman JL, Song JK, Newell DW. Cerebral aneurysms. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(9):928–939. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra052760.
    1. Anxionnat R, Bracard S, Ducrocq X, Trousset Y, Launay L, Kerrien E, Braun M, Vaillant R, Scomazzoni F, Lebedinsky A, Picard L. Intracranial aneurysms: clinical value of 3D digital subtraction angiography in the therapeutic decision and endovascular treatment. Radiology. 2001;218(3):799–808. doi: 10.1148/radiology.218.3.r01mr09799.
    1. White PM, Wardlaw JM, Easton V. Can noninvasive imaging accurately depict intracranial aneurysms? A systematic review. Radiology. 2000;217(2):361–370. doi: 10.1148/radiology.217.2.r00nv06361.
    1. Tanoue S, Kiyosue H, Kenai H, Nakamura T, Yamashita M, Mori H. Three-dimensional reconstructed images after rotational angiography in the evaluation of intracranial aneurysms: surgical correlation. Neurosurgery. 2000;47(4):866–871. doi: 10.1097/00006123-200010000-00016.

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever