Display options
Cite
Ngo MT, Lee UY, Ha H, et al. Comparison of Hemodynamic Visualization in Cerebral Arteries: Can Magnetic Resonance Imaging Replace Computational Fluid Dynamics?. J Pers Med. 2021;11(4)doi: 10.3390/jpm11040253.
Ngo, M. T., Lee, U. Y., Ha, H., Jin, N., Chung, G. H., Kwak, Y. G., Jung, J., & Kwak, H. S. (2021). Comparison of Hemodynamic Visualization in Cerebral Arteries: Can Magnetic Resonance Imaging Replace Computational Fluid Dynamics?. Journal of personalized medicine, 11(4), . https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11040253
Ngo, Minh Tri, et al. "Comparison of Hemodynamic Visualization in Cerebral Arteries: Can Magnetic Resonance Imaging Replace Computational Fluid Dynamics?." Journal of personalized medicine vol. 11,4 (2021). doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm11040253
Ngo MT, Lee UY, Ha H, Jin N, Chung GH, Kwak YG, Jung J, Kwak HS. Comparison of Hemodynamic Visualization in Cerebral Arteries: Can Magnetic Resonance Imaging Replace Computational Fluid Dynamics?. J Pers Med. 2021 Mar 30;11(4). doi: 10.3390/jpm11040253. PMID: 33808514; PMCID: PMC8066205.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Pers Med. 2021 Mar 30;11(4). doi: 10.3390/jpm11040253.

Comparison of Hemodynamic Visualization in Cerebral Arteries: Can Magnetic Resonance Imaging Replace Computational Fluid Dynamics?.

Journal of personalized medicine

Minh Tri Ngo, Ui Yun Lee, Hojin Ha, Ning Jin, Gyung Ho Chung, Yeong Gon Kwak, Jinmu Jung, Hyo Sung Kwak

Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology and Research Institute of Clinical Medicine of Jeonbuk National University, Biomedical Research Institute of Jeonbuk National University Hospital, Jeon-ju 54907, Korea.
  2. Division of Mechanical Design Engineering, Jeonbuk National University, Jeon-ju 54896, Korea.
  3. Department of Mechanical and Biomedical Engineering, Kangwon National University, Chuncheon 24341, Korea.
  4. Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc., Chicago, IL 60089, USA.
  5. Hemorheology Research Institute, Jeonbuk National University, Jeon-ju 54896, Korea.

PMID: 33808514 PMCID: PMC8066205 DOI: 10.3390/jpm11040253

Abstract

A multimodality approach was applied using four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow MRI), time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography (TOF-MRA) signal intensity gradient (SIG), and computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to investigate the 3D blood flow characteristics and wall shear stress (WSS) of the cerebral arteries. TOF-MRA and 4D flow MRI were performed on the major cerebral arteries in 16 healthy volunteers (mean age 34.7 ± 7.6 years). The flow rate measured with 4D flow MRI in the internal carotid artery, middle cerebral artery, and anterior cerebral artery were 3.8, 2.5, and 1.2 mL/s, respectively. The 3D blood flow pattern obtained through CFD and 4D flow MRI on the cerebral arteries showed reasonable consensus. CFD delivered much greater resolution than 4D flow MRI. TOF-MRA SIG and CFD WSS of the major cerebral arteries showed reasonable consensus with the locations where the WSS was relatively high. However, the visualizations were very different between TOF-MRA SIG and CFD WSS at the internal carotid artery bifurcations, the anterior cerebral arteries, and the anterior communicating arteries. 4D flow MRI, TOF-MRA SIG, and CFD are complementary methods that can provide additional insight into the hemodynamics of the human cerebral artery.

Keywords: cerebral arteries; computational fluid dynamics (CFD); four-dimensional flow magnetic resonance imaging (4D flow MRI); hemodynamics visualization; signal intensity gradient from time-of-flight magnetic resonance angiography (TOF-MRA SIG)

References

  1. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1992 Jul-Aug;2(4):453-62 - PubMed
  2. Radiology. 2015 Apr;275(1):245-54 - PubMed
  3. Neuroradiology. 2010 Oct;52(10):913-20 - PubMed
  4. Comput Biol Med. 2015 Nov 1;66:235-41 - PubMed
  5. Lancet. 1990 Mar 31;335(8692):765-74 - PubMed
  6. J Cardiovasc Dis Res. 2012 Apr;3(2):76-83 - PubMed
  7. Stroke. 2004 Nov;35(11):2500-5 - PubMed
  8. J Biomech Eng. 2014 Apr;136(4): - PubMed
  9. Curr Opin Neurol. 2016 Aug;29(4):419-28 - PubMed
  10. Stroke Res Treat. 2018 Nov 27;2018:3238165 - PubMed
  11. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2013 Oct;38(4):876-84 - PubMed
  12. J Neuroimaging. 2015 May-Jun;25(3):403-7 - PubMed
  13. Front Neurol. 2020 Jan 17;10:1372 - PubMed
  14. Stroke. 2020 Mar;51(3):775-783 - PubMed
  15. J Biomech Eng. 2006 Dec;128(6):844-51 - PubMed
  16. J Biomech Eng. 2008 Apr;130(2):021015 - PubMed
  17. Diagnostics (Basel). 2019 Dec 13;9(4): - PubMed
  18. NMR Biomed. 2009 Oct;22(8):795-808 - PubMed
  19. J Eng Math. 2009 Aug 1;64(4):367-378 - PubMed
  20. Magn Reson Imaging. 2018 May;48:62-69 - PubMed
  21. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2013 Sep;34(9):1740-5 - PubMed
  22. Surg Neurol. 2009 Nov;72(5):444-50; discussion 450 - PubMed
  23. World Neurosurg. 2015 Jan;83(1):80-6 - PubMed
  24. NMR Biomed. 2014 Jul;27(7):826-34 - PubMed
  25. Magn Reson Med. 2018 Jan;79(1):129-140 - PubMed
  26. World Neurosurg. 2018 Dec;120:e1301-e1309 - PubMed
  27. Physiol Meas. 2015 Jul;36(7):1517-27 - PubMed
  28. J Hypertens. 2006 Mar;24(3):503-15 - PubMed
  29. Magn Reson Med. 2009 Jan;61(1):65-74 - PubMed
  30. Magn Reson Med. 2009 Feb;61(2):409-17 - PubMed
  31. Comput Biol Med. 2018 Sep 1;100:221-229 - PubMed
  32. J Am Heart Assoc. 2016 Jan 04;5(1): - PubMed
  33. Korean J Radiol. 2016 Jul-Aug;17(4):445-62 - PubMed
  34. J Cardiovasc Magn Reson. 2015 Aug 10;17:72 - PubMed
  35. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2015 Mar 31;35(4):648-54 - PubMed
  36. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:7087086 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support