Cargando…

Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations

Several image-based computational models have been used to perform mechanical analysis for atherosclerotic plaque progression and vulnerability investigations. However, differences of computational predictions from those models have not been quantified at multi-patient level. In vivo intravascular u...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wang, Qingyu, Tang, Dalin, Wang, Liang, Meahara, Akiko, Molony, David, Samady, Habib, Zheng, Jie, Mintz, Gary S., Stone, Gregg W., Giddens, Don P.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8298251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33759037
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10237-021-01450-8
_version_ 1783726025942761472
author Wang, Qingyu
Tang, Dalin
Wang, Liang
Meahara, Akiko
Molony, David
Samady, Habib
Zheng, Jie
Mintz, Gary S.
Stone, Gregg W.
Giddens, Don P.
author_facet Wang, Qingyu
Tang, Dalin
Wang, Liang
Meahara, Akiko
Molony, David
Samady, Habib
Zheng, Jie
Mintz, Gary S.
Stone, Gregg W.
Giddens, Don P.
author_sort Wang, Qingyu
collection PubMed
description Several image-based computational models have been used to perform mechanical analysis for atherosclerotic plaque progression and vulnerability investigations. However, differences of computational predictions from those models have not been quantified at multi-patient level. In vivo intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) coronary plaque data were acquired from seven patients. Seven 2D/3D models with/without circumferential shrink, cyclic bending and fluid–structure interactions (FSI) were constructed for the seven patients to perform model comparisons and quantify impact of 2D simplification, circumferential shrink, FSI and cyclic bending plaque wall stress/strain (PWS/PWSn) and flow shear stress (FSS) calculations. PWS/PWSn and FSS averages from seven patients (388 slices for 2D and 3D thin-layer models) were used for comparison. Compared to 2D models with shrink process, 2D models without shrink process overestimated PWS by 17.26%. PWS change at location with greatest curvature change from 3D FSI models with/without cyclic bending varied from 15.07% to 49.52% for the seven patients (average = 30.13%). Mean Max-FSS, Min-FSS and Ave-FSS from the flow-only models under maximum pressure condition were 4.02%, 11.29% and 5.45% higher than those from full FSI models with cycle bending, respectively. Mean PWS and PWSn differences between FSI and structure-only models were only 4.38% and 1.78%. Model differences had noticeable patient variations. FSI and flow-only model differences were greater for minimum FSS predictions, notable since low FSS is known to be related to plaque progression. Structure-only models could provide PWS/PWSn calculations as good approximations to FSI models for simplicity and time savings in calculation.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8298251
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-82982512021-07-23 Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations Wang, Qingyu Tang, Dalin Wang, Liang Meahara, Akiko Molony, David Samady, Habib Zheng, Jie Mintz, Gary S. Stone, Gregg W. Giddens, Don P. Biomech Model Mechanobiol Original Paper Several image-based computational models have been used to perform mechanical analysis for atherosclerotic plaque progression and vulnerability investigations. However, differences of computational predictions from those models have not been quantified at multi-patient level. In vivo intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) coronary plaque data were acquired from seven patients. Seven 2D/3D models with/without circumferential shrink, cyclic bending and fluid–structure interactions (FSI) were constructed for the seven patients to perform model comparisons and quantify impact of 2D simplification, circumferential shrink, FSI and cyclic bending plaque wall stress/strain (PWS/PWSn) and flow shear stress (FSS) calculations. PWS/PWSn and FSS averages from seven patients (388 slices for 2D and 3D thin-layer models) were used for comparison. Compared to 2D models with shrink process, 2D models without shrink process overestimated PWS by 17.26%. PWS change at location with greatest curvature change from 3D FSI models with/without cyclic bending varied from 15.07% to 49.52% for the seven patients (average = 30.13%). Mean Max-FSS, Min-FSS and Ave-FSS from the flow-only models under maximum pressure condition were 4.02%, 11.29% and 5.45% higher than those from full FSI models with cycle bending, respectively. Mean PWS and PWSn differences between FSI and structure-only models were only 4.38% and 1.78%. Model differences had noticeable patient variations. FSI and flow-only model differences were greater for minimum FSS predictions, notable since low FSS is known to be related to plaque progression. Structure-only models could provide PWS/PWSn calculations as good approximations to FSI models for simplicity and time savings in calculation. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-03-23 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8298251/ /pubmed/33759037 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10237-021-01450-8 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Paper
Wang, Qingyu
Tang, Dalin
Wang, Liang
Meahara, Akiko
Molony, David
Samady, Habib
Zheng, Jie
Mintz, Gary S.
Stone, Gregg W.
Giddens, Don P.
Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations
title Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations
title_full Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations
title_fullStr Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations
title_full_unstemmed Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations
title_short Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations
title_sort multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons: 2d/3d and fluid–structure interaction simulations
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8298251/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33759037
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10237-021-01450-8
work_keys_str_mv AT wangqingyu multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT tangdalin multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT wangliang multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT meaharaakiko multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT molonydavid multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT samadyhabib multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT zhengjie multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT mintzgarys multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT stonegreggw multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations
AT giddensdonp multipatientstudyforcoronaryvulnerableplaquemodelcomparisons2d3dandfluidstructureinteractionsimulations