TY - JOUR
T1 - Flow-based method demonstrates improved accuracy for calculating wall shear stress in arterial flows from 4D flow MRI data
AU - Hurd, Elliott R.
AU - Iffrig, Elizabeth
AU - Jiang, David
AU - Oshinski, John N.
AU - Timmins, Lucas H.
N1 - Funding Information:
This study was supported, in part, by funding from the National Institutes of Health – R01 HL150608, (LHT), R01 EB027774 (JNO), R21 NS114602 (JNO), and the Stimulating Access to Research in Residency (R38 AI140299; EI). The sponsor had no involvement in the study design, in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, and in the decision to submit the manuscript for publication. The authors would like to thank Professor Gerard Ateshian at Columbia University for his assistance with the FSI model.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Elsevier Ltd
PY - 2023/1
Y1 - 2023/1
N2 - Four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (i.e., 4D flow MRI) has become a valuable tool for the in vivo assessment of blood flow within large vessels and cardiac chambers. As wall shear stress (WSS) has been correlated with the development and progression of cardiovascular disease, focus has been directed at developing techniques to quantify WSS directly from 4D flow MRI data. The goal of this study was to compare the accuracy of two such techniques – termed the velocity and flow-based methods – in the setting of simplified and complex flow scenarios. Synthetic MR data were created from exact solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations for the steady and pulsatile flow of an incompressible, Newtonian fluid through a rigid cylinder. In addition, synthetic MR data were created from the predicted velocity fields derived from a fluid–structure interaction (FSI) model of pulsatile flow through a thick-walled, multi-layered model of the carotid bifurcation. Compared to the analytical solutions for steady and pulsatile flow, the flow-based method demonstrated greater accuracy than the velocity-based method in calculating WSS across all changes in fluid velocity/flow rate, tube radius, and image signal-to-noise (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the velocity-based method was more sensitive to boundary segmentation than the flow-based method. When compared to results from the FSI model, the flow-based method demonstrated greater accuracy than the velocity-based method with average differences in time-averaged WSS of 0.31 ± 1.03 Pa and 0.45 ± 1.03 Pa, respectively (p <0.005). These results have implications on the utility, accuracy, and clinical translational of methods to determine WSS from 4D flow MRI.
AB - Four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (i.e., 4D flow MRI) has become a valuable tool for the in vivo assessment of blood flow within large vessels and cardiac chambers. As wall shear stress (WSS) has been correlated with the development and progression of cardiovascular disease, focus has been directed at developing techniques to quantify WSS directly from 4D flow MRI data. The goal of this study was to compare the accuracy of two such techniques – termed the velocity and flow-based methods – in the setting of simplified and complex flow scenarios. Synthetic MR data were created from exact solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations for the steady and pulsatile flow of an incompressible, Newtonian fluid through a rigid cylinder. In addition, synthetic MR data were created from the predicted velocity fields derived from a fluid–structure interaction (FSI) model of pulsatile flow through a thick-walled, multi-layered model of the carotid bifurcation. Compared to the analytical solutions for steady and pulsatile flow, the flow-based method demonstrated greater accuracy than the velocity-based method in calculating WSS across all changes in fluid velocity/flow rate, tube radius, and image signal-to-noise (p < 0.001). Furthermore, the velocity-based method was more sensitive to boundary segmentation than the flow-based method. When compared to results from the FSI model, the flow-based method demonstrated greater accuracy than the velocity-based method with average differences in time-averaged WSS of 0.31 ± 1.03 Pa and 0.45 ± 1.03 Pa, respectively (p <0.005). These results have implications on the utility, accuracy, and clinical translational of methods to determine WSS from 4D flow MRI.
KW - Biomechanics
KW - Cardiac MRI
KW - Fluid–structure interaction
KW - Hemodynamics
KW - Phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging
KW - Pulsatile Flow
KW - Blood Flow Velocity/physiology
KW - Models, Cardiovascular
KW - Stress, Mechanical
KW - Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods
KW - Carotid Arteries/diagnostic imaging
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85144407497&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85144407497&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111413
DO - 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.111413
M3 - Article
C2 - 36535100
AN - SCOPUS:85144407497
SN - 0021-9290
VL - 146
SP - 111413
JO - Journal of Biomechanics
JF - Journal of Biomechanics
M1 - 111413
ER -