0
Technical Briefs

Comparison of the In Vitro Hemodynamic Performance of New Flow Diverters for Bypass of Brain Aneurysms

[+] Author and Article Information
Asher L. Trager

Department of Biomedical Engineering,  University of Miami, 1251 Memorial Drive, Coral Gables, FL 33146

Chander Sadasivan

Department of Neurological Surgery,  State University of New York at Stony Brook, 100 Nicolls Rd, Stony Brook, NY 11794

Baruch B. Lieber1

Department of Neurological Surgery,  State University of New York at Stony Brook, 100 Nicolls Rd, Stony Brook, NY 11794baruch.lieber@sbumed.org

1

Corresponding author. Present address: Department of Neurological Surgery, HSC T12, Room 080, Stony Brook University Medical Center, Stony Brook, New York 11794-8122.

J Biomech Eng 134(8), 084505 (Aug 08, 2012) (6 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4006454 History: Received November 08, 2011; Revised March 21, 2012; Posted March 26, 2012; Published August 08, 2012; Online August 08, 2012

One possible treatment for cerebral aneurysms is a porous tubular structure, similar to a stent, called a flow diverter. A flow diverter can be placed across the neck of a cerebral aneurysm to induce the cessation of flow and initiate the formation of an intra-aneurysmal thrombus. This excludes the aneurysm from the parent artery and returns the flow of blood to normal. Previous flow diverting devices have been analyzed to determine optimal characteristics, such as braiding angle and wire diameter. From this information, a new optimized device was designed to achieve equivalent hemodynamic performance to the previous best device, but with better longitudinal flexibility to preserve physiological arterial configuration. The new device was tested in vitro in an elastomeric replica of the rabbit elastase induced aneurysm model and is now in the process of being tested in vivo. Particle image velocimetry was utilized to determine the velocity field in the plane of symmetry of the model under pulsatile flow conditions. Device hemodynamic performance indices such as the hydrodynamic circulation were evaluated from the velocity fields. Comparison of these indices with the previous best device and a control shows that the significant design changes of the device did not change its hemodynamic attributes (p > 0.05).

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

PIV results of the flow patterns within the elastomer model during a cardiac cycle. Results are after implantation of Diverter #4. Starting at time = 0 ms in intervals of 66.6 ms.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

PIV results of the flow patterns within the elastomer model during a cardiac cycle. Results are after implantation of Diverter #7. Starting at time = 0 ms in intervals of 66.6 ms.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

The temporal development of the hydrodynamic circulation inside the aneurysm. (a) The case without the diverter, the control case. (a) The circulation after Diverter #7 and Diverter #4 were implanted. Error bars are the standard error of the mean.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

The mean and peak hydrodynamic circulation inside the aneurysm. Error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 6) (ns: P > 0.05, ***: P < 0.001).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

The temporal development of the kinetic energy inside the aneurysm. (a) The case without the diverter, the control case. (b) The kinetic energy after Diverter #7 and Diverter #4 were implanted. Error bars are the standard error of the mean (n = 3).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

The mean and peak kinetic energy inside the aneurysm. Error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 6) (ns: P > 0.05, ***: P < 0.001).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

The temporal evolution of the flow inside the vertebral artery. Error bars are the standard error of the mean (n = 3).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of the mean and peak flow rate inside the vertebral artery. Error bars represent the standard deviation (n = 3) (ns: P > 0.05, *: P < 0.05).

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In