Why the study?
Does fluid-structure interaction methodology improve the identification of critical wall shear stress regions compared to rigid wall models in aortic dissection simulations?
Does fluid-structure interaction methodology improve the identification of critical wall shear stress regions compared to rigid wall models in aortic dissection simulations?
Fluid-structure interaction models are justified for patient-tailored simulations of aortic dissection as they identify critical regions of low and oscillatory wall shear stress missed by rigid wall models.
FSI may better capture critical hemodynamics in aortic dissection models; leaves open human validation before clinical adoption.
Through comparison with imaging data, the results of the present study indicate that the fluid-structure interaction methodology employed herein is appropriate for simulations of aortic dissection. Regions of high wall shear stress were not significantly altered by the wall motion, however, certain collocated regions of low and oscillatory wall shear stress which may be critical for disease progression were only identified in the FSI simulation. We conclude that, if patient-tailored simulations of aortic dissection are to be used as an interventional planning tool, then the additional complexity, expertise and computational expense required to model wall motion is indeed justified.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alimohammadi et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: