Fluid-structure interaction modeling of abdominal aortic aneurysms: the impact of patient-specific inflow conditions and fluid/solid coupling.

Rupture risk assessment of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA) by means of biomechanical analysis is a viable alternative to the traditional clinical practice of using a critical diameter for recommending elective repair. However, an accurate prediction of biomechanical parameters, such as mechanical stress, strain, and shear stress, is possible if the AAA models and boundary conditions are truly patient specific. In this work, we present a complete fluid-structure interaction (FSI) framework for patient-specific AAA passive mechanics assessment that utilizes individualized inflow and outflow boundary conditions. The purpose of the study is two-fold: (1) to develop a novel semiautomated methodology that derives velocity components from phase-contrast magnetic resonance images (PC-MRI) in the infrarenal aorta and successfully apply it as an inflow boundary condition for a patient-specific fully coupled FSI analysis and (2) to apply a one-way-coupled FSI analysis and test its efficiency compared to transient computational solid stress and fully coupled FSI analyses for the estimation of AAA biomechanical parameters. For a fully coupled FSI simulation, our results indicate that an inlet velocity profile modeled with three patient-specific velocity components and a velocity profile modeled with only the axial velocity component yield nearly identical maximum principal stress (σ1), maximum principal strain (ε1), and wall shear stress (WSS) distributions. An inlet Womersley velocity profile leads to a 5% difference in peak σ1, 3% in peak ε1, and 14% in peak WSS compared to the three-component inlet velocity profile in the fully coupled FSI analysis. The peak wall stress and strain were found to be in phase with the systolic inlet flow rate, therefore indicating the necessity to capture the patient-specific hemodynamics by means of FSI modeling. The proposed one-way-coupled FSI approach showed potential for reasonably accurate biomechanical assessment with less computational effort, leading to differences in peak σ1, ε1, and WSS of 14%, 4%, and 18%, respectively, compared to the axial component inlet velocity profile in the fully coupled FSI analysis. The transient computational solid stress approach yielded significantly higher differences in these parameters and is not recommended for accurate assessment of AAA wall passive mechanics. This work demonstrates the influence of the flow dynamics resulting from patient-specific inflow boundary conditions on AAA biomechanical assessment and describes methods to evaluate it through fully coupled and one-way-coupled fluid-structure interaction analysis.

[1]  Mark F Fillinger,et al.  Prediction of rupture risk in abdominal aortic aneurysm during observation: wall stress versus diameter. , 2003, Journal of vascular surgery.

[2]  Elena S. Di Martino,et al.  Effect of Variation in Intraluminal Thrombus Constitutive Properties on Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Wall Stress , 2003, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[3]  Yannis Papaharilaou,et al.  A decoupled fluid structure approach for estimating wall stress in abdominal aortic aneurysms. , 2007, Journal of biomechanics.

[4]  Itthi Chatnuntawech,et al.  A Framework for the Automatic Generation of Surface Topologies for Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Models , 2010, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[5]  Mark F Fillinger,et al.  In vivo analysis of mechanical wall stress and abdominal aortic aneurysm rupture risk. , 2002, Journal of vascular surgery.

[6]  Elena S. Di Martino,et al.  Fluid-structure interaction within realistic three-dimensional models of the aneurysmatic aorta as a guidance to assess the risk of rupture of the aneurysm. , 2001, Medical engineering & physics.

[7]  M. Egger,et al.  Risk factors for asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm: systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based screening studies. , 2004, European journal of public health.

[8]  M L Raghavan,et al.  Toward a biomechanical tool to evaluate rupture potential of abdominal aortic aneurysm: identification of a finite strain constitutive model and evaluation of its applicability. , 2000, Journal of biomechanics.

[9]  M. Olufsen,et al.  Numerical Simulation and Experimental Validation of Blood Flow in Arteries with Structured-Tree Outflow Conditions , 2000, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[10]  Ender A Finol,et al.  Semiautomatic vessel wall detection and quantification of wall thickness in computed tomography images of human abdominal aortic aneurysms. , 2010, Medical physics.

[11]  A. R. Brady,et al.  Mortality results for randomised controlled trial of early elective surgery or ultrasonographic surveillance for small abdominal aortic aneurysms , 1998, The Lancet.

[12]  R. Mohiaddin,et al.  Comparison of Aortic Flow Patterns Before and After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation , 2012 .

[13]  Heterogeneous, Variable Wall-Thickness Modeling of a Ruptured Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm , 2004 .

[14]  David A. Vorp,et al.  In Vivo Three-Dimensional Surface Geometry of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms , 1999, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[15]  Frans van de Vosse,et al.  Biomechanical properties of abdominal aortic aneurysms assessed by simultaneously measured pressure and volume changes in humans. , 2008, Journal of vascular surgery.

[16]  C. M. Scotti,et al.  Wall stress and flow dynamics in abdominal aortic aneurysms: finite element analysis vs. fluid–structure interaction , 2008, Computer methods in biomechanics and biomedical engineering.

[17]  J. Womersley Method for the calculation of velocity, rate of flow and viscous drag in arteries when the pressure gradient is known , 1955, The Journal of physiology.

[18]  M. Webster,et al.  Wall stress distribution on three-dimensionally reconstructed models of human abdominal aortic aneurysm. , 2000, Journal of vascular surgery.

[19]  Shmuel Einav,et al.  Patient-Based Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Rupture Risk Prediction with Fluid Structure Interaction Modeling , 2010, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[20]  Anne Newman,et al.  Cardiovascular Disease and Mortality in Older Adults with Small Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Detected by Ultrasonography: The Cardiovascular Health Study , 2001, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[21]  David A. Vorp,et al.  Mechanical wall stress in abdominal aortic aneurysm: influence of diameter and asymmetry. , 1998, Journal of vascular surgery.

[22]  L. A. Anderson Abdominal aortic aneurysm. , 2001, The Journal of cardiovascular nursing.

[23]  Ender A. Finol,et al.  Compliant biomechanics of abdominal aortic aneurysms: A fluid-structure interaction study , 2007 .

[24]  Elena S. Di Martino,et al.  Three-dimensional geometrical characterization of abdominal aortic aneurysms: image-based wall thickness distribution. , 2009, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[25]  B J B M Wolters,et al.  A patient-specific computational model of fluid-structure interaction in abdominal aortic aneurysms. , 2005, Medical engineering & physics.

[26]  D. A. Mcdonald,et al.  The relation of pulsatile pressure to flow in arteries , 1955, The Journal of physiology.

[27]  D J Ballard,et al.  Prevalence and Associations of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Detected through Screening , 1997, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[28]  Alexander D. Shkolnik,et al.  Fluid-structure interaction in abdominal aortic aneurysms: effects of asymmetry and wall thickness , 2005, Biomedical engineering online.

[29]  Alan M. Shih,et al.  Hemodynamic Analysis of a Compliant Femoral Artery Bifurcation Model using a Fluid Structure Interaction Framework , 2008, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[30]  Shmuel Einav,et al.  Abdominal aortic aneurysm risk of rupture: patient-specific FSI simulations using anisotropic model. , 2009, Journal of biomechanical engineering.

[31]  Michael S Sacks,et al.  A planar biaxial constitutive relation for the luminal layer of intra-luminal thrombus in abdominal aortic aneurysms. , 2006, Journal of biomechanics.

[32]  M. Webster,et al.  Ex vivo biomechanical behavior of abdominal aortic aneurysm: Assessment using a new mathematical model , 1996, Annals of Biomedical Engineering.

[33]  Tobin A. Driscoll,et al.  Algorithm 756: a MATLAB toolbox for Schwarz-Christoffel mapping , 1996, TOMS.

[34]  Pascal Verdonck,et al.  Intraluminal thrombus and risk of rupture in patient specific abdominal aortic aneurysm – FSI modelling , 2009 .

[35]  Ursula Kose,et al.  Computational fluid dynamics of abdominal aortic aneurysms with patient-specific inflow boundary conditions , 2006, SPIE Medical Imaging.

[36]  R. J. Valentine,et al.  Watchful waiting in cases of small abdominal aortic aneurysms- appropriate for all patients? , 2000, Journal of vascular surgery.

[37]  R. Fournier Basic Transport Phenomena In Biomedical Engineering , 1998 .

[38]  N. Cheshire,et al.  Fluid structure interaction of patient specific abdominal aortic aneurysms: a comparison with solid stress models , 2006, Biomedical engineering online.