Four-Dimensional Flow Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Assessment of Velocity Magnitudes and Flow Patterns in The Human Carotid Artery Bifurcation: Comparison with Computational Fluid Dynamics

Abstract

Purpose: Knowledge of the hemodynamics in the vascular system is important to understand and treat vascular pathology. The present study aimed to evaluate the hemodynamics in the human carotid artery bifurcation measured by four-dimensional (4D) flow magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as compared to computational fluid dynamics (CFD). Methods: This protocol used MRI data of 12 healthy volunteers for the 3D vascular models and 4D flow MRI measurements for the boundary conditions in CFD simulation. We compared the velocities measured at the carotid bifurcation and the 3D velocity streamlines of the carotid arteries obtained by these two methods. Results: There was a good agreement for both maximum and minimum velocity values between the 2 methods for velocity magnitude at the bifurcation plane. However, on the 3D blood flow visualization, secondary flows, and recirculation regions are of poorer quality when visualized through the 4D flow MRI. Conclusion: 4D flow MRI and CFD show reasonable agreement in demonstrated velocity magnitudes at the carotid artery bifurcation. However, the visualization of blood flow at the recirculation regions and the assessment of secondary flow characteristics should be enhanced for the use of 4D flow MRI in clinical situations.

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

“…Generally, the blood flow patterns given by both methods showed reasonable consensus with the locations where the flow velocity was relatively low and where it was relatively high. However, similar to the reports of several previous studies [ 21 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 ], the maximum velocity magnitude of the blood flow tended to be lower in the 4D flow MRI models than in CFD simulations. The velocity fields from the CFD and 4D flow MRI showed large differences at ACA A2.…”

Patient‐Specific 3D Bioprinted Models of Developing Human Heart

“…Simultaneous use of these experimental and computational tools enables comparison and verification of the efficacy of these methods, especially in such complex geometries and flow scenarios. [ 40 ] The accuracy of scaling each construct to different sizes and the prescribed flow parameters was verified through CFD modeling and calculation of the wall shear stress at each scale. Our results showed an adequate agreement and consistency in the wall shear stress ranges generated at all different scales of the two models, when compared to the range obtained for the natural‐size (1×) structures (0–1 Pa for e‐HT structures and 0–20 Pa for f‐LV constructs).…”

Evaluation of Plaque Vulnerability via Combination of Hemodynamic Analysis and Simultaneous Non-Contrast Angiography and Intraplaque Hemorrhage (SNAP) Sequence for Carotid Intraplaque Hemorrhage

“…Blood density was assumed to be 1066 kg/m 3 . A rigid no-slip boundary condition was set for the wall condition [ 15 , 16 ]. For the boundary condition of CCA and ICA, the published flow rate was applied, and patient-specific areas of the CCA and ICA were used to calculate velocity [ 17 ].…”