Pulsatile arterial wall-blood flow interaction with wall pre-stress computed using an inverse algorithm

BACKGROUND: The computation of arterial wall deformation and stresses under physiologic conditions requires a coupled compliant arterial wall-blood flow interaction model. The in-vivo arterial wall motion is constrained by tethering from the surrounding tissues. This tethering, together with the average in-vivo pressure, results in wall pre-stress. For an accurate simulation of the physiologic conditions, it is important to incorporate the wall pre-stress in the computational model. The computation of wall pre-stress is complex, as the un-loaded and un-tethered arterial shape with residual stress is unknown. In this study, the arterial wall deformation and stresses in a canine femoral artery under pulsatile pressure was computed after incorporating the wall pre-stresses. A nonlinear least square optimization based inverse algorithm was developed to compute the in-vivo wall pre-stress. METHODS: First, the proposed inverse algorithm was used to obtain the un-loaded and un-tethered arterial geometry from the unstressed in-vivo geometry. Then, the un-loaded, and un-tethered arterial geometry was pre-stressed by applying a mean in-vivo pressure of 104.5 mmHg and an axial stretch of 48% from the un-tethered length. Finally, the physiologic pressure pulse was applied at the inlet and the outlet of the pre-stressed configuration to calculate the in-vivo deformation and stresses. The wall material properties were modeled with an incompressible, Mooney-Rivlin model derived from previously published experimental stress-strain data (Attinger et al., 1968). RESULTS: The un-loaded and un-tethered artery geometry computed by the inverse algorithm had a length, inner diameter and thickness of 35.14 mm, 3.10 mm and 0.435 mm, respectively. The pre-stressed arterial wall geometry was obtained by applying the in-vivo axial-stretch and average in-vivo pressure to the un-loaded and un-tethered geometry. The length of the pre-stressed artery, 51.99 mm, was within 0.01 mm (0.019%) of the in-vivo length of 52.0 mm; the inner diameter of 3.603 mm was within 0.003 mm (0.08%) of the corresponding in-vivo diameter of 3.6 mm, and the thickness of 0.269 mm was within 0.0015 mm (0.55%) of the in-vivo thickness of 0.27 mm. Under physiologic pulsatile pressure applied to the pre-stressed artery, the time averaged longitudinal stress was found to be 42.5% higher than the circumferential stresses. The results of this study are similar to the results reported by Zhang et al., (2005) for the left anterior descending coronary artery. CONCLUSIONS: An inverse method was adopted to compute physiologic pre-stress in the arterial wall before conducting pulsatile hemodynamic calculations. The wall stresses were higher in magnitude in the longitudinal direction, under physiologic pressure after incorporating the effect of in-vivo axial stretch and pressure loading.