Radiological Physics and Technology

, Volume 9, Issue 2, pp 277–285 | Cite as

Evaluation of the impact of carotid artery bifurcation angle on hemodynamics by use of computational fluid dynamics: a simulation and volunteer study

Article

Abstract

In this study, we evaluated the hemodynamics of carotid artery bifurcation with various geometries using simulated and volunteer models based on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) was analyzed by use of OpenFOAM. The velocity distribution, streamline, and wall shear stress (WSS) were evaluated in a simulated model with known bifurcation angles (30°, 40°, 50°, 60°, derived from patients’ data) and in three-dimensional (3D) healthy volunteer models. Separated flow was observed at the outer side of the bifurcation, and large bifurcation models represented upstream transfer of the point. Local WSS values at the outer bifurcation [both simulated (<30 Pa) and volunteer (<50 Pa) models] were lower than those in the inner region (>100 Pa). The bifurcation angle had a significant negative correlation with the WSS value (p<0.05). The results of this study show that the carotid artery bifurcation angle is related to the WSS value. This suggests that hemodynamic stress can be estimated based on the carotid artery geometry. The construction of a clinical database for estimation of developing atherosclerosis is warranted.

Keywords

Computational fluid dynamics Pulsatile flow Carotid artery bifurcation angle Wall shear stress Atherosclerosis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by the Digital image scientific research conference in Mihara.

Complicance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Sho E, Sho M, Singh TM, Xu C, Zarins CK, Masuda H. Blood flow decrease induces apoptosis of endothelial cells in previously dilated arteries resulting from chronic high blood flow. Arter Thromb Vasc Biol. 2001;21(7):1139–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kumar V, Cotran SR, Robbins LS. Section10 vascular. Robbins basic pathology. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2003. p. 409–54.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhang Y, Furusawa T, Sia SF, Umezu M, Qian Y. Proposition of an outflow boundary approach for carotid artery stenosis CFD simulation. Comput Method Biomech Biomed Eng. 2013;16(5):488–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nguyen KT, Clark CD, Chancellor TJ, Papavassiliou DV. Carotid geometry effects on blood flow and on risk for vascular disease. J Biomech. 2008;41(1):11–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lee SW, Antiga L, Steinman DA. Correlations among indicators of disturbed flow at the normal carotid bifurcation. J Biomech Eng. 2009;131(6):061013.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saho T, Onishi H. Quantitative comparison of hemodynamics in simulated and 3D angiography models of cerebral aneurysms by use of computational fluid dynamics. Radiol Phys Technol. 2015;8(2):258–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zarins CK, Giddens DP, Bharadvaj BK, Sottiurai VS, Mabon RF, Glagov S. Carotid bifurcation atherosclerosis. Quantitative correlation of plaque localization with flow velocity profiles and wall shear stress. Circ Res. 1983;53(4):502–14.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saho T, Onishi H, Sugihara T, Nakamura Y, Yuda I. Tackling hemodynamic analysis of the carotid artery using opensource software and computational fluid dynamics. Nihon Housyasen Gijutsu Gakkai Zasshi. 2013;69:1241–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jou LD, van Tyen R, Berger SA, Saloner D. Calculation of the magnetization distribution for fluid flow in curved vessels. Magn Reson Med. 1996;35(4):577–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dolan JM, Meng H, Singh S, Paluch R, Kolega J. High fluid shear stress and spatial shear stress gradients affect endothelial proliferation, survival, and alignment. Ann Biomed Eng. 2011;39(6):1620–31.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sitzer M, Puac D, Buehler A, Steckel AD, Kegler S, Markus SH, Steinmetz H. Internal carotid artery angle of origin: a novel risk factor for early carotid atherosclerosis. Stroke. 2003;34:950–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Markl M, Wegent F, Zech T, Bauer S, Strecker C, Schumacher M, Weiller C, Hennig J, Harloff A. In vivo wall shear stress distribution in the carotid artery effect of bifurcation geometry, internal carotid artery stenosis, and recanalization therapy. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2010;3(6):647–55.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Marshall I, Zhao S, Papathanasopoulou P, Hoskins P, Xu XY. MRI and CFD studies of pulsatile flow in healthy and stenosed carotid bifurcation models. J Biomech. 2004;37(5):679–87.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Papathanasopoulou P, Zhao S, Köhler U, Robertson MB, Long Q, Hoskins P, Xu XY, Marshall I. MRI measurement of time-resolved wall shear stress vectors in a carotid bifurcation model, and comparison with CFD predictions. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2003;17(2):153–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kamenskiy AV, Pipinos II, Dzenis YA, Bikhchandani J, Gupta PK, Phillips N, Kazmi SAJ, MacTaggart JN. Effects of carotid artery stenting on arterial geometry. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217(2):251–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee SW, Antiga L, Spence JD, Steinman DA. Geometry of the carotid bifurcation predicts its exposure to disturbed flow. Stroke. 2008;39:2341–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sarpkaya T. Experimental determination of the critical Reynolds number for pulsating Poiseuille flow. J Fluid Eng. 1966;88(3):589–98.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Iaccarino G. Predictions of a turbulent separated flow using commercial CFD codes. J Fluid Eng. 2001;123(4):819–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    De SD, Franjić BD, Lovričević I, Vukelićand M, Palenkić H. Carotid bifurcation position and branching angle in patients with atherosclerotic carotid disease. Coll Antropol. 2005;29(2):627–32.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moyle KR, Antiga L, Steinman DA. Inlet conditions for image-based CFD models of the carotid bifurcation: is it reasonable to assume fully developed flow? J Biomech Eng. 2006;128(3):371–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lee SW, Steinman DA. On the relative importance of rheology for image-based CFD models of the carotid bifurcation. J Biomech Eng. 2007;129(2):273–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Younis HF, Kaazempur-Mofrad MR, Chan RC, Isasi AG, Hinton DP, Chau AH, Kim LA, Kamm RD. Hemodynamics and wall mechanics in human carotid bifurcation and its consequences for atherogenesis: investigation of inter-individual variation. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2004;3(1):17–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japanese Society of Radiological Technology and Japan Society of Medical Physics 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Radiological TechnologyKokura Memorial HospitalFukuokaJapan
  2. 2.Program in Biological System SciencesGraduate School of Comprehensive Scientific Research, Prefectural University of HiroshimaHiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations