Computational Study of Fenestration and Parallel Grafts Used in Aortic Arch Lesion
10.16156/j.1004-7220.2023.02.23
- VernacularTitle:开窗技术与平行支架技术治疗主动脉弓部病变的血流动力学研究
- Author:
Kai LU
1
;
Xiaofan SUN
2
;
Chen PENG
2
;
Yi SI
2
;
Yan SHAN
3
;
Weiguo FU
2
;
Shengzhang WANG
1
,
4
,
5
Author Information
1. Department of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Institute of Biomechanics, Fudan University
2. Department of Vascular Surgery, Zhongshan Hospital
3. Department of Radiology, Zhongshan Hospital
4. Institute of Biomedical Engineering Technology, Academy ofEngineering and Technology, Fudan University
5. Yiwu Research Institute, Fudan University
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
fenestration;
parallel grafts;
computational fluid dynamics ( CFD);
aortic arch lesion;
Windkessel model
- From:
Journal of Medical Biomechanics
2023;38(2):E360-E367
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective To explore hemodynamics of the aortic arch and supraarch vessels after thoracic endovascular aortic repair with fenestration and parallel grafts techniques, and compare the differences of these techniques. Methods Four patients with aortic arch lesions whose supraarch vessels were reconstructed by different surgical techniques (fenestration, chimney and periscope) were studied, and three-dimensional (3D) geometric models were established based on postoperative image data. The physiological flow obtained from two dimensional (2D) phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging were imposed on the ascending aorta inlet and the supraarch vessels outlets. The pressure waveform of 3-element Windkessel model was imposed on the descending aorta outlet. Through computational fluid dynamics ( CFD ) simulations, the hemodynamic parameters were obtained, including the pressure of supraarch vessels, the velocity vector of the stent inlet, and the relative residence time. Results The pressure change of the periscope stent was the largest, followed by the fenestration stent, and the pressure change of the chimney stent was the smallest. The velocity of the fenestration and periscope stent inlet was uneven, which might form vortex. The velocity of the chimney stent inlet was even. The high relative residence time concentrated in distal end of the fenestration stent outer wall, the ‘gutter’ part, and the place where the chimney and periscope stent adhered to the vessel wall. Conclusions The pressure difference between the inner and outer walls of the fenestration and periscope stent was high, so it was recommended to use the balloon-expandable stent. The pressure difference between the inner and outer walls of the chimney stent was low, so it was recommended to use the self-expanding stent. The predicted location of thrombosis was consistent with the clinical follow-up data, so it may be used for surgical planning and risk assessment of interventional treatment of aortic arch lesions.
