Numerical investigation of fluid–particle interactions for embolic stroke

  • Debanjan Mukherjee
  • Jose Padilla
  • Shawn C. Shadden
Original Article


Roughly one-third of all strokes are caused by an embolus traveling to a cerebral artery and blocking blood flow in the brain. The objective of this study is to gain a detailed understanding of the dynamics of embolic particles within arteries. Patient computed tomography image is used to construct a three-dimensional model of the carotid bifurcation. An idealized carotid bifurcation model of same vessel diameters was also constructed for comparison. Blood flow velocities and embolic particle trajectories are resolved using a coupled Euler–Lagrange approach. Blood is modeled as a Newtonian fluid, discretized using the finite volume method, with physiologically appropriate inflow and outflow boundary conditions. The embolus trajectory is modeled using Lagrangian particle equations accounting for embolus interaction with blood as well as vessel wall. Both one- and two-way fluid–particle coupling are considered, the latter being implemented using momentum sources augmented to the discretized flow equations. It was observed that for small-to-moderate particle sizes (relative to vessel diameters), the estimated particle distribution ratio—with and without the inclusion of two-way fluid–particle momentum exchange—were found to be similar. The maximum observed differences in distribution ratio with and without the coupling were found to be higher for the idealized bifurcation model. Additionally, the distribution was found to be reasonably matching the volumetric flow distribution for the idealized model, while a notable deviation from volumetric flow was observed in the anatomical model. It was also observed from an analysis of particle path lines that particle interaction with helical flow, characteristic of anatomical vasculature models, could play a prominent role in transport of embolic particle. The results indicate therefore that flow helicity could be an important hemodynamic indicator for analysis of embolus particle transport. Additionally, in the presence of helical flow, and vessel curvature, inclusion of two-way momentum exchange was found to have a secondary effect for transporting small to moderate embolus particles—and one-way coupling could be used as a reasonable approximation, thereby causing substantial savings in computational resources.


Hemodynamics Embolic stroke Fluid–particle coupling Helicity Collision 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Vasculature Modeling Toolkit (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Apte S.V., Mahesh K., Lundgren T.: Accounting for finite-size effects in simulations of disperse particle-laden flows. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 34(3), 260–271 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Arboix A., Alió J.: Cardioembolic stroke: clinical features, specific cardiac disorders and prognosis. Curr. Cardiol. Rev. 6(3), 150–161 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balachandar S., Eaton J.K.: Turbulent dispersed multiphase flow. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 42(1), 111–133 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berlemont A., Desjonqueres P., Gouesbet G.: Particle Lagrangian simulation in turbulent flows. Int. J. Multiph. Flow 16(1), 19–34 (1990)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bushi D., Grad Y., Einav S., Yodfat O., Nishri B., Tanne D.: Hemodynamic evaluation of embolic trajectory in an arterial bifurcation: an in-vitro experimental model. Stroke 36(12), 2696–2700 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Caro C.G., Doorly D.J., Tarnawski M., Scott K.T., Long Q., Dumoulin C.L.: Non-planar curvature and branching of arteries and non-planar type flow. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 452(1944), 185–197 (1996)CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carr I.A., Nemoto N., Schwartz R.S., Shadden S.C.: Size-dependent predilections of cardiogenic embolic transport. Am. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 305(5), H732–H739 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chung, E.M.L., Hague, J.P., Chanrion, M.: Embolus trajectory through a physical replica of the major cerebral arteries. Stroke 41, 647–652, (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elghobashi S.: On predicting particle-laden turbulent flows. Appl. Sci. Res. 52(4), 309–329 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ericson C.: Real-Time Collision Detection. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fabbri D., Long Q., Das S., Pinelli M.: Computational modelling of emboli travel trajectories in cerebral arteries: influence of microembolic particle size and density. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 13(2), 289–302 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ferziger J.H., Peric M.: Computational Methods for Fluid Dynamics, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (2002)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gallo D., Steinman D.A., Bijari P.B., Morbiducci U.: Helical flow in carotid bifurcation as surrogate marker of exposure to disturbed shear. J. Biomech. 45(14), 2398–2404 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Grigioni M., Daniele C., Morbiducci U., Del Gaudio C., D’Avenio G., Balducci A., Barbaro V.: A mathematical description of blood spiral flow in vessels: application to a numerical study of flow in arterial bending. J. Biomech. 38(7), 1375–1386 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haider A., Levenspiel O.: Drag coefficient and terminal velocity of spherical and nonspherical particles. Powder Technol. 58(1), 63–70 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Johnson K.L.: Contact Mechanics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1987)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim I., Elghobashi S., Sirignano W.A.: On the equation for spherical-particle motion: effect of Reynolds and acceleration numbers. J. Fluid Mech. 367(1), 221–253 (1998)CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ku D.N.: Blood flow in arteries. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 29(1), 399–434 (1997)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Long Q., Xu X.Y., Ariff B., Thom S.A., Hughes A.D., Stanton A.V.: Reconstruction of blood flow patterns in a human carotid bifurcation: a combined CFD and MRI study. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 11(3), 299–311 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lorenz R., Bock J., Barker A.J., von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff F., Wallis W., Korvink J.G., Bissell M.M., Schulz-Menger J., Markl M.: 4D flow magnetic resonance imaging in bicuspid aortic valve disease demonstrates altered distribution of aortic blood flow helicity. Magn. Reson. Med. 71(4), 1542–1553 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Macdonald R.L., Kowalczuk A., Johns L.: Emboli enter penetrating arteries of monkey brain in relation to their size. Stroke 26(7), 1247–1250 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Maxey M.R., Riley J.J.: Equation of motion for a small rigid sphere in a nonuniform flow. Phys. Fluids 26, 883 (1983)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Moffatt H.K.: Helicity and singular structures in fluid dynamics. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 111(10), 3663–3670 (2014)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moffatt H.K., Tsinober A.: Helicity in laminar and turbulent flow. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 24, 281–312 (1992)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Morbiducci U., Gallo D., Ponzini R., Massai D., Antiga L., Montevecchi F.M., Redaelli A.: Quantitative analysis of bulk flow in image-based hemodynamic models of the carotid bifurcation: the influence of outflow conditions as test case. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 38(12), 3688–3705 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Morbiducci U., Ponzini R., Rizzo G., Cadioli M., Esposito A., Montevecchi F.M., Redaelli A.: Mechanistic insight into the physiological relevance of helical blood flow in the human aorta: an in vivo study. Biomech. Model. Mechanobiol. 10(3), 339–355 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Nichols W., O’Rourke M., Vlachopoulos C.: McDonald’s Blood Flow in Arteries: Theoretical, Experimental and Clinical Principles. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Olufsen, M.S.: Structured tree outflow condition for blood flow in larger systemic arteries. Ame. J. Physiol. Heart Circ. Physiol. 276(36), 257–268, (1999)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Pollanen M.S.: Behaviour of suspended particles at bifurcations: implications for embolism. Phys. Med. Biol. 36, 397–401 (1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rapp J.H., Hollenbeck K., Pan X.M.: An experimental model of lacunar infarction: embolization of microthrombi. J. Vasc. Surg. 48(1), 196–200 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Sun C., SH Lee J., Zhang M.: Magnetic nanoparticles in mr imaging and drug delivery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 60(11), 1252–1265 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yushkevich P.A., Piven J., Hazlett H.C., Smith R.G., Ho S., Gee J.C., Gerig G.: User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. NeuroImage 31(3), 1116–1128 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Zamir M., Sinclair P., Wonnacott T.H.: Relation between diameter and flow in major branches of the arch of the aorta. J. Biomech. 25(11), 1303–1310 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical EngineeringUniversity of California, BerkeleyBerkeleyUSA
  2. 2.Los Angeles City CollegeLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations