TY - JOUR
T1 - Multi-patient study for coronary vulnerable plaque model comparisons
T2 - 2D/3D and fluid–structure interaction simulations
AU - Wang, Qingyu
AU - Tang, Dalin
AU - Wang, Liang
AU - Meahara, Akiko
AU - Molony, David
AU - Samady, Habib
AU - Zheng, Jie
AU - Mintz, Gary S.
AU - Stone, Gregg W.
AU - Giddens, Don P.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, The Author(s).
PY - 2021/8
Y1 - 2021/8
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - Models comparison
KW - Patient-specific model
KW - VH-IVUS
KW - Vulnerable plaque
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85103168283&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s10237-021-01450-8
DO - 10.1007/s10237-021-01450-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 33759037
AN - SCOPUS:85103168283
SN - 1617-7959
VL - 20
SP - 1383
EP - 1397
JO - Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
JF - Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
IS - 4
ER -