Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2019 Oct;40(10):1759-1765.
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A6222. Epub 2019 Sep 26.

A Multicenter Pilot Study on the Clinical Utility of Computational Modeling for Flow-Diverter Treatment Planning

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

A Multicenter Pilot Study on the Clinical Utility of Computational Modeling for Flow-Diverter Treatment Planning

B W Chong et al. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2019 Oct.

Abstract

Background and purpose: Selection of the correct flow-diverter size is critical for cerebral aneurysm treatment success, but it remains challenging due to the interplay of device size, anatomy, and deployment. Current convention does not address these challenges well. The goals of this pilot study were to determine whether computational modeling improves flow-diverter sizing over current convention and to validate simulated deployments.

Materials and methods: Seven experienced neurosurgeons and interventional neuroradiologists used computational modeling to prospectively plan 19 clinical interventions. In each patient case, physicians simulated 2-4 flow-diverter sizes that were under consideration based on preprocedural imaging. In addition, physicians identified a preferred device size using the current convention. A questionnaire on the impact of computational modeling on the procedure was completed immediately after treatment. Rotational angiography image data were acquired after treatment and compared with flow-diverter simulations to validate the output of the software platform.

Results: According to questionnaire responses, physicians found the simulations useful for treatment planning, and they increased their confidence in device selection in 94.7% of cases. After viewing the simulations results, physicians selected a device size that was different from the original conventionally planned device size in 63.2% of cases. The average absolute difference between clinical and simulated flow-diverter lengths was 2.1 mm. In 57% of cases, average simulated flow-diverter diameters were within the measurement uncertainty of clinical flow-diverter diameters.

Conclusions: Physicians found computational modeling to be an impactful and useful tool for flow-diverter treatment planning. Validation results showed good agreement between simulated and clinical flow-diverter diameters and lengths.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig 1.
Fig 1.
Sample simulation result from the SurgicalPreview computational modeling software showing a 3D model of the FD inside a pretreatment vessel (A), a frame from a deployment video (B), and a cross-section of the FD (red) and vessel (blue) at a position along the vessel centerline (C).
Fig 2.
Fig 2.
Examples of posttreatment clinical reconstructions (red/left) and pretreatment simulation results (black/right) for the same FD sizes. The deployment pairs are sorted in ascending order according to the difference between actual and simulated device lengths, which ranged from 1.58 to 4.06 mm.
Fig 3.
Fig 3.
Bland-Altman plots showing dots that represent differences between the actual clinical and simulated deployments in FD length (A) and FD diameter (B). The plots show the means for the deployment pairs on the x-axis and the differences between pairs on the y-axis.
Fig 4.
Fig 4.
Average FD diameters for the actual clinical and simulated deployments. Error bars in the clinical FD diameter measurements were calculated by averaging 15 random measurements of FD thickness along the length of each reconstructed FD model.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Briganti F, Delehaye L, Leone G, et al. . Flow diverter device for the treatment of small middle cerebral artery aneurysms. J NeuroIntervent Surg 2016;8:287–94 10.1136/neurintsurg-2014-011460 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bhogal P, Pérez MA, Ganslandt O, et al. . Treatment of posterior circulation non–saccular aneurysms with flow diverters: a single-center experience and review of 56 patients. J NeuroIntervent Surg 2017;9:471–81 10.1136/neurintsurg-2016-012781 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Saatci I, Yavuz K, Ozer C, et al. . Treatment of intracranial aneurysms using the Pipeline flow-diverter embolization device: a single-center experience with long–term follow–up results. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:1436–46 10.3174/ajnr.A3246 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. P100018/S015, PipelineTM, Flex Embolization Device approval letter. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf10/P100018S015A.pdf. Accessed May 22, 2019.
    1. Caroff J, Tamura T, King RM, et al. . Phosphorylcholine surface modified flow diverter associated with reduced intimal hyperplasia. J NeuroIntervent Surg 2018;10:1097–1101 10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-013776 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types