0
Research Papers

Inputs for Subject-Specific Computational Fluid Dynamics Simulation of Blood Flow in the Mouse Aorta

[+] Author and Article Information
Mark Van Doormaal

Mouse Imaging Centre,
Hospital for Sick Children,
25 Orde Street,
Toronto, ON M5T 3H7, Canada

Yu-Qing Zhou

Mouse Imaging Centre,
Hospital for Sick Children,
25 Orde Street,
Toronto, ON M5T 3H7, Canada
e-mail: yqzhou@mouseimaging.ca

Xiaoli Zhang

Mouse Imaging Centre,
Hospital for Sick Children,
25 Orde Street,
Toronto, ON M5T 3H7, Canada
e-mail: xzhang@mouseimaging.ca

David A. Steinman

Mechanic and Industrial Engineering,
University of Toronto,
5 King's College Road,
Toronto, ON M5S 3G8, Canada
e-mail: steinman@mie.utoronto.ca

R. Mark Henkelman

Mem. ASME
Mouse Imaging Centre,
Hospital for Sick Children,
25 Orde Street,
Toronto, ON M5T 3H7, Canada
e-mail: mhenkel@mouseimaging.ca

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received November 15, 2013; final manuscript received July 18, 2014; accepted manuscript posted July 30, 2014; published online August 12, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Alison Marsden.

J Biomech Eng 136(10), 101008 (Aug 12, 2014) (8 pages) Paper No: BIO-13-1535; doi: 10.1115/1.4028104 History: Received November 15, 2013; Revised July 18, 2014; Accepted July 30, 2014

Mouse models are an important way for exploring relationships between blood hemodynamics and eventual plaque formation. We have developed a mouse model of aortic regurgitation (AR) that produces large changes in plaque burden with charges in hemodynamics [Zhou et al., 2010, "Aortic Regurgitation Dramatically Alters the Distribution of Atherosclerotic Lesions and Enhances Atherogenesis in Mice," Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., 30(6), pp. 1181–1188]. In this paper, we explore the amount of detail needed for realistic computational fluid dynamics (CFD) calculations in this experimental model. The CFD calculations use inputs based on experimental measurements from ultrasound (US), micro computed tomography (CT), and both anatomical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and phase contrast MRI (PC-MRI). The adequacy of five different levels of model complexity (a) subject-specific CT data from a single mouse; (b) subject-specific CT centerlines with radii from US; (c) same as (b) but with MRI derived centerlines; (d) average CT centerlines and averaged vessel radius and branching vessels; and (e) same as (d) but with averaged MRI centerlines) is evaluated by demonstrating their impact on relative residence time (RRT) outputs. The paper concludes by demonstrating the necessity of subject-specific geometry and recommends for inputs the use of CT or anatomical MRI for establishing the aortic centerlines, M-mode US for scaling the aortic diameters, and a combination of PC-MRI and Doppler US for estimating the spatial and temporal characteristics of the input wave forms.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2014 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Zhou, Y. Q., Zhu, S. N., Foster, F. S., Cybulsky, M. I., and Henkelman, R. M., 2010, “Aortic Regurgitation Dramatically Alters the Distribution of Atherosclerotic Lesions and Enhances Atherogenesis in Mice,” Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., 30(6), pp. 1181–1188. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hoi, Y., Zhou, Y. Q., Zhang, X., Henkelman, R. M., and Steinman, D. A., 2011, “Correlation Between Local Hemodynamics and Lesion Distribution in a Novel Aortic Regurgitation Murine Model of Atherosclerosis,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 39(5), pp. 1414–1422. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Sharpe, J., Ahlgren, U., Perry, P., Hill, B., Ross, A., Hecksher-Sorensen, J., Baldock, R., and Davidson, D., 2002, “Optical Projection Tomography as a Tool for 3D Microscopy and Gene Expression Studies,” Science, 296(5567), pp. 541–545. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wong, M. D., Dazai, J., Walls, J. R., Gale, N. W., and Henkelman, R. M., 2013, “Design and Implementation of a Custom Built Optical Projection Tomography System,” PLoS One, 8(9), p. e73491. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Van Doormaal, M. A., Kazakidi, A., Wylezinska, M., Hunt, A., Tremoleda, J. L., Protti, A., Bohraus, Y., Gsell, W., Weinberg, P. D., and Ethier, C. R., 2012, “Haemodynamics in the Mouse Aortic Arch Computed From MRI-Derived Velocities at the Aortic Root,” J. R. Soc. Interface, 9(76), pp. 2834–2844. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Feintuch, A., Ruengsakulrach, P., Lin, A., Zhang, J., Zhou, Y. Q., Bishop, J., Davidson, L., Courtman, D., Foster, F. S., Steinman, D. A., Henkelman, R. M., and Ethier, C. R., 2007, “Hemodynamics in the Mouse Aortic Arch as Assessed by MRI, Ultrasound, and Numerical Modeling,” Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol., 292(2), pp. H884–892. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Suo, J., Ferrara, D. E., Sorescu, D., Guldberg, R. E., Taylor, W. R., and Giddens, D. P., 2007, “Hemodynamic Shear Stresses in Mouse Aortas: Implications for Atherogenesis,” Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., 27(2), pp. 346–351. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Vandeghinste, B., 2011, “Replacing Vascular Corrosion Casting by in Vivo Micro-CT Imaging for Building 3D Cardiovascular Models in Mice,” Mol. Imaging Biol., 13(1), pp. 78–86. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Greve, J. M., Les, A. S., Tang, B. T., Draney Blomme, M. T., Wilson, N. M., Dalman, R. L., Pelc, N. J., and Taylor, C. A., 2006, “Allometric Scaling of Wall Shear Stress From Mice to Humans: Quantification Using Cine Phase-Contrast MRI and Computational Fluid Dynamics,” Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol., 291(4), pp. H1700–1708. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Feintuch, A., Zhu, Y., Bishop, J., Davidson, L., Dazai, J., Bruneau, B. G., and Henkelman, R. M., 2007, “4D Cardiac MRI in the Mouse,” NMR Biomed., 20(3), pp. 360–365. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Zhou, Y. Q., Davidson, L., Henkelman, R. M., Nieman, B. J., Foster, F. S., Yu, L. X., and Chen, X. J., 2004, “Ultrasound-Guided Left-Ventricular Catheterization: A Novel Method of Whole Mouse Perfusion for Microimaging,” Lab. Invest., 84(3), pp. 385–389. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Hoi, Y., Van Doormaal, M., Zhou, Y.-Q., Zhang, X., Henkelman, R. M., and Steinman, D. A., 2011, “Degree of Retrograde Flow and Its Effects on Local Hemodynamics and Plaque Distribution in an Aortic Regurgitation Mouse Model of Atherosclerosis,” ASME Paper No. SBC2011-53161. [CrossRef]
Trachet, B., Bols, J., De Santis, G., Vandenberghe, S., Loeys, B., and Segers, P., 2011, “The Impact of Simplified Boundary Conditions and Aortic Arch Inclusion on CFD Simulations in the Mouse Aorta: A Comparison With Mouse-Specific Reference Data,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 133(12), p. 121006. [CrossRef]
Minev, P. D., 1998, “A Characteristic/Finite Element Algorithm for the 3-D Navier–Stokes Equations Using Unstructured Grids,” Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng., 178(1), pp. 39–50. [CrossRef]
Lee, S. W., Antiga, L., and Steinman, D. A., 2009, “Correlations Among Indicators of Disturbed Flow at the Normal Carotid Bifurcation,” ASME J. Biomech. Eng., 131(6), p. 061013. [CrossRef]
Himburg, H. A., Grzybowski, D. M., Hazel, A. L., LaMack, J. A., Li, X. M., and Friedman, M. H., 2004, “Spatial Comparison Between Wall Shear Stress Measures and Porcine Arterial Endothelial Permeability,” Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol., 286(5), pp. H1916–1922. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Dean, W. R., 1927, “Note on the Motion of Fluid in a Curved Pipe,” Philos. Mag., 4(20), pp. 208–223. [CrossRef]
Moore, J. A., Rutt, B. K., Karlik, S. J., Yin, K., and Ethier, C. R., 1999, “Computational Blood Flow Modeling Based on In Vivo Measurements,” Ann. Biomed. Eng., 27(5), pp. 627–640. [CrossRef] [PubMed]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Graphic prescriptions from MR angiography determine the aortic centerline and for in vivo US M-mode recordings to measure aortic diameters. Two localization images are required to localize the aortic arch and descending aorta images separately, with six slices (AAr_1–AAr_6) acquired on aortic arch (upper left) and 16 slices (DAo_15–DAo_16) on descending aorta (lower left). On the right, B-mode US images along the centerline of the aorta at three cross-sectional levels are shown. US M-mode recordings were made at the proximal ascending aorta immediately distal to the aortic sinus (AAr_1) (upper right), at the initial segment of the descending thoracic aorta where the curved aortic arch became straight (Dao_1) (middle right), and at the proximal abdominal aorta prior to the celiac artery (Dao_15) (lower right). LV is the left ventricle and Li is the liver.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

In-plane (left) and out-of-plane (right) angles shown for the first branch in an example mouse aorta. The right side view is normal to the left side view.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

View of the mouse aortic arch showing differing curvatures in the descending aorta and aortic arch for several different reconstructions. Contours of normalized RRT are shown. (a) Mouse-specific microCT derived geometry with no vessel radius correction. (b) Mouse-specific microCT derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (c) Mouse-specific MRI derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (d) Mouse-averaged microCT derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (e) Mouse-averaged MRI derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Side view of the mouse aortic arch showing contours of normalized RRT for several different reconstructions. (a) Mouse-specific microCT derived geometry with no vessel radius correction. (b) Mouse-specific microCT derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (c) Mouse-specific MRI derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (d) Mouse-averaged microCT derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M- mode US measured vessel radius. (e) Mouse-averaged MRI derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

View of the inner curvature (upper panel) and outer curvature (lower panel) of the mouse aortic arch showing contours of normalized RRT for several different reconstructions. (a)–(e) corresponds to the same models as listed in Fig. 3.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

View of the descending thoracic aorta of the mouse, shown flattened, with contours of normalized RRT for several different reconstructions. (a) Mouse-specific microCT derived geometry with no vessel radius correction. (b) Mouse-specific microCT derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (c) Mouse-specific MRI derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (d) Mouse-averaged microCT derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius. (e) Mouse-averaged MRI derived geometry with vessel radius corrected to M-mode US measured vessel radius.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

View of the descending thoracic aorta of the mouse using the mouse-averaged CT geometry, shown flattened, with contours of normalized RRT for varying degrees of AR. Changes in AR severity were modeled by varying the amount of retrograde diastolic flow in the aorta while keeping the systolic flow the same. AR70 corresponds to only 70% of the retrograde diastolic flow.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

View of the descending thoracic aorta of the five different mice, shown flattened, with contours of normalized RRT for subject-specific MRI and microCT based reconstructions

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