A Computational Desk for Surgeons

  • Victoria Hilford
  • Yusuf Yildiz
  • Marc Garbey


According to the American Heart Association, cardiovascular disease is an underlying cause of death that accounted for 37.3% of all deaths, or one of every 2.7 deaths in the United States in 2003. Many of these deaths corresponding to vascular disease are due to the rupture of an aneurism or the rupture of a vulnerable plaque usually located near the narrowing of blood vessels, also called stenosis [1, 2]. The interested reader can refer to the chapters of Mark Davies et al. and Scott Berceli et al. in this volume for an overview of low extremity vessels diseases.

Endovascular surgery is a relatively new procedure to treat such problems that may develop in blood vessels. In recent years, we have seen the development of intravascular balloons, stents, and coils that can be put in place through arteries with minimum invasive procedures. Endovascular surgery is performed by radiologists, neurosurgeons, cardiologists, and vascular surgeons. This surgery is essentially guided by imaging such as X-ray techniques. The interested reader can refer to the chapter of Mark Davies et al. for a review of the state of the art, and the chapter of Berceli et al. that emphasize the system biology approach of the problem.

Typically, workflow involved in the planning of endovascular surgery includes the acquisition of the patient’s medical image in DICOM (Digital Imaging and Communications in Medicine) format, the image visualization such as zooming, rotating, 2D and 3D rendering that allows the surgeon to identify a region of interest (ROI), the image processing that allows segmentation of the original medical image based on the chosen ROI, creating a model by using the geometry extraction on the ROI, extracting patient-specific boundary condition parameters for flow simulation, running the simulation, and visualization of the results. The surgeon will repeat these steps easily as many times as needed to come up with a decision. The surgeon will also be able to virtually modify the geometry of artery lumen, in order to anticipate the outcome of a surgical procedure.


Domain Decomposition Penalty Method Image Visualization Endovascular Surgery Magnetic Resonance Imaging Slice 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Greenlund KJ, Giles WH, Keenan NL (2006) Heart disease and stroke mortality in the 20th century. In: Ward J, Warren C (eds) Silent victories: the history and practice of public health in twentieth century America. Oxford University Press, Oxford, EnglandGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thom T, Haase N, Rosamond W, Howard VJ, Rumsfeld J, Manolio T et al (2006) Heart disease and stroke statistics – 2006 update. Circulation 113(6):e85–e151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Garbey M, Picard C, Hilford V (2008) Toward an intelligent data and visualization desk for endovascular surgery. In: Conference of computers and their applications CATA 2008, Cancun, MexicoGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hilford V, Garbey M, Vadakattu S, Addison C (2007) WIMI – Web Interface to Medical Information, best paper award in data engineering at SEDE’07, 16th internat. In: Conference on software engineering and data engineering, July 2007, Las Vegas, USAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maisel JM, Wisnicki HJ (2002) Documenting the medical encounter with speech recognition: physicians can adopt this new technology to increase the turnaround time of quality records. Ophthalmology Times 27(5):38–41Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gosbee J, Ritchie E (1997) Human–computer interaction and medical software development. Interactions 4(4):13–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zick RG, Olsen J (2001) Voice recogition software versus a traditional transcription Service for physician charting in the ED. Am J Emerg Med 19(4):295–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Roop ES (2006) Speaking of savings: can speech recognition deliver? For the Record 18(10):24Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Srinivasan S, Haque S, Mital D Java enterprise wide application for clinical databases. In: 7th international conference on control, automation, robotics and vision (ICARCV’OZ), DK 2002, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zudilova EV, Sloot PMA, Belleman RG. A multi-modal interface for an interactive simulated vascular reconstruction system. In: Proceedings of the fourth IEEE international conference on multimodal interfaces. Section of Computational Science Faculty of Science, University of AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang F, Rabsch C, Liu P (2007) Using SVG to model and query image annotations and their history. IEEE Int Conf Bioinform Biomed 412–422Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stanford University. iPAD, Stanford University. Available at:
  13. 13.
    Northwestern University, Stanford University. Annotation Imaging Markup (AIM), Northwestern University, Stanford University. Available at:
  14. 14.
    Philippe PUECH, Loc BOUSSEL. DicomWorks. Available at:
  15. 15.
    DesAcc Inc. Digital Jacket Pro, DesAcc Inc. Available at:
  16. 16.
    TeraRecon Inc. TeraRecon, TeraRecon Inc., San Mateo, CA. Available at:
  17. 17.
    CoActiv Medical Business Solutions. CoActiv, CoActiv Medical Business Solutions, Ridgefield, CT. Available at:
  18. 18.
    Biotronics3D Ltd. Biotronics3D, Biotronics3D Ltd, London, England. Available at:
  19. 19.
    Guthrie B. Emageon, Division of Neurosurgery at University of Alabama in Birmingham (UAB). Available at:
  20. 20.
    Rasband W. ImageJ, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. Available at:
  21. 21.
    Lee H-W, Liu B-D, Hung K-C, Lei S-F, Wang P-C, Yang T-L (2009) Breast tumor classification of ultrasound images using wavelet-based channel energy and imageJ. IEEE J Sel Top Signal Process 3(1) 81–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cannataro M, Guzzi PH, Tradigo G, Veltri P. A tool for the semiautomatic acquisition of the morphological data of blood vessel networks. In: International symposium on parallel and distributed processing with applications, Laboratory of Bioinformatics, University Magna Grcia of Catanzaro, Catanzaro, Italy, 2008Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sage D, Unser M (2003) Teaching image-processing programming in Java. IEEE Signal Process Mag 20(6):43–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Agrafiotis D, Bull DR, Canagarajah N (2003) ROI coding of volumetric medical images with application to visualisation. In: Proceedings of the 3rd international symposium on image and signal processing and analysis, Image Communications Group, Centre for Communications Research, University of Bristol, UKGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yang Y, George S, Martin DR, Tannenbaum AR, Giddens DP. 3D modeling of patient-specific geometries of portal veins using MR images. In: Proceedings of the 28th IEEE EMBS annual international conference, New York, NY, 30 Aug–3 Sept 2006Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Vistrails. Vistrails, University of Utah. Available:
  27. 27.
    Barratt DC, Ariff BB, Humphries KN, Thom SAMG, Hughes AD (2004) Reconstruction and quantification of the carotid artery bifurcation from 3-D ultrasound images. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 23(5):567–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jialiang C, Shengzhang W, Wei Y, Guanghong D (2008) Computational fluid dynamics modeling of intracranial aneurysms. In: 2008 International conference on biomedical engineering and informaticsGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Swillens A, Segers P, Lovstakken L, Torp H. A comparison of multidimensional flow estimation techniques using computational fluid dynamics: speckle tracking versus vector Doppler. In: 2008 IEEE international ultrasonics symposium proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Medis. Medis, Leiden, The Netherlands. Available at:
  31. 31.
    Musick M (2008) Mason researchers unveil new blood flow simulation system for diagnosing brain aneurysms. Mason Gazette, 9 June 2008Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ansys. Fluent, AnSYS. Available at:
  33. 33.
    Varghese SS, Frankel SH, Fischer PF (2007) Direct numerical simulation of stenotic flows. Part 1. Steady flow. J Fluid Mech 582:253–280MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Varghese SS, Frankel SH, Fischer PF (2007) Direct numerical simulation of stenotic flows. Part 2. Pulsatile flow. J Fluid Mech 582:281–318MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Deville MO, Fischer PF, Mund EH (2002) High-order methods for incompressible fluid flow. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UKMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Choi G, Cheng CP, Wilson NM, Taylor CA (2009) Methods for quantifying three-dimensional deformation of arteries due to pulsatile and nonpulsatile forces: implications for the design of stents and stent grafts. Ann Biomed Eng 37(1):14–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Humphrey JD, Taylor CA (2008) Intracranial and abdominal aortic aneurysms: similarities, differences, and need for a new class of computational models. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 10: 221–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Tang BT, Cheng CP, Draney MT, Wilson NM, Tsao PS, Herfkens RJ, Taylor CA (2006) Abdominal aortic hemodynamics in young healthy adults at rest and during lower limb exercise: quantification using image-based computer modeling. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 291:H668–H676CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Vignon-Clementel IE, Figueroa CA, Jansen KE, Taylor CA (2006) Outflow boundary conditions for three-dimensional finite element modeling of blood flow and pressure in arteries. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 195:29–32, 3776–3796MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
  41. 41.
    Garbey M, Hadri B, Hilford V, Karmonik C (2007) Parallel image-based hemodynamic simulator. Proceeding of ICSNC’07, workshop HPC-Bio07, FranceGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Garbey M, Picard C (2007) Toward a general solution verification method for complex PDE problem with hands off coding. In: 45th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, 2007. AIAA-2007-1132Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    McDonald DA (1990) Blood flow in arteries, 3rd edn. Edward Arnold, LondonGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Shyy W (2001) Moving boundaries in micro-scale biofluid dynamics. Appl Mech Rev 54(5):405–453CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Ye T, Mittal R, Udaykumar HS, Shyy W (1999) An accurate Cartesian grid method for viscous incompressible flows with complex immersed boundaries. JCP 156:209–240MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Arquis E, Caltagirone JP (1984) Sur les conditions hydrodynamiques au voisinage d’une interface milieu fluide-milieux poreux: application a la convection naturelle. CR Acad Sci Paris II 299:1–4Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Schneider K, Farge M (2005) Numerical simuation of the transient flow behavior in tube bundles using a volume penalization method. J Fluids Struct 20:555–566CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Angot P, Bruneau CH, Fabrie P (1999) A penalisation method to take into account obstacles in viscous flows. Numerische Mathematik 81:497–520MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Chan TF, Vese LA (2001) Active contours without edges. IEE Transac Image Process 10(2):266–277MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Osher S, Paragios N (2003) Geometric level set methods in imaging, vision and graphics, ISBN 0387954880. Springer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Sethian JA (1999) Level set methods and fast marching methods: evolving interfaces in computational geometry, fluid mechanics, computer vision, and materials science. In: Ciarlet PG, Iserles A, Kohn RV, Wright MH (eds) Cambridge Monographs on Computational Mathematics (No. 3)Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Barberou N, Garbey M, Hess M, Resch M, Rossi T, Toivanen J, Tromeur Dervout D (2003) Efficient metacomputing of elliptic linear and non-linear problems. J Parallel Distrib Comput 63:564–577MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Garbey M, Tromeur Dervout D (2002) On some Aitken like acceleration of the Schwarz Method. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 40:1493–1513MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Chorin AJ (1967) The numerical solution on the Navier–Stokes equations for an incompressible fluid. Bull Am Math Soc 73:928MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    David Keyes. Technologies and tools for high-performance distributed computing. In: Seventh workshop on the DOE, Advanced CompuTational Software (ACTS) collection, Aug 2006Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Garbey M (2005) Acceleration of the Schwarz method for elliptic problems. SIAM J Sci Comput 26(6):1871–1893MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Garbey M, Hadri B, Shyy W. Fast elliptic solver for incompressible Navier–Stokes flow and heat transfer problems on the grid. In: 43rd Aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit conference, Reno, Jan 2005, paper number: AIAA-2005-1386, p 12Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Garbey M, Hadri B (2006) Toward real time image base CFD. In: 17th international conference on domain decomposition methods, July 2006, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Garbey M, Pacull F (2007) A versatile incompressible Navier–Stokes solver for blood flow application. Int J Numer Methods Fluids 54(5):473–496MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Hadri B (2008) A fast domain decomposition applied to blood flow simlulation. PhD Dissertation, Department of Computer Science, University of Houston, Mar 2008, 122 ppGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of HoustonHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations