How Do Coil Configuration and Packing Density Influence Intra-Aneurysmal Hemodynamics?

References

1. 1.↵
   1. van Gijn J,
   2. Rinkel GJ

   . Subarachnoid haemorrhage: diagnosis, causes and management. Brain 2001;124:249–78

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
2. 2.↵
   1. Molyneux AJ,
   2. Kerr RS,
   3. Yu LM,
   4. et al

   . International subarachnoid aneurysm trial (ISAT) of neurosurgical clipping versus endovascular coiling in 2143 patients with ruptured intracranial aneurysms: a randomised comparison of effects on survival, dependency, seizures, rebleeding, subgroups, and aneurysm occlusion. Lancet 2005;366:809–17

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
3. 3.↵
   1. Henkes H,
   2. Fischer S,
   3. Weber W,
   4. et al

   . Endovascular coil occlusion of 1811 intracranial aneurysms: early angiographic and clinical results. Neurosurgery 2004;54:268–80; discussion 80–85

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
4. 4.↵
   1. Park SH,
   2. Lee CY,
   3. Yim MB

   . The merits of endovascular coil surgery for patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2008;43:270–74

   CrossRefPubMed
5. 5.↵
   1. Raymond J,
   2. Guilbert F,
   3. Weill A,
   4. et al

   . Long-term angiographic recurrences after selective endovascular treatment of aneurysms with detachable coils. Stroke 2003;34:1398–403

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
6. 6.↵
   1. Kawanabe Y,
   2. Sadato A,
   3. Taki W,
   4. et al

   . Endovascular occlusion of intracranial aneurysms with Guglielmi detachable coils: correlation between coil packing density and coil compaction. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2001;143:451–55

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
7. 7.↵
   1. Sluzewski M,
   2. van Rooij WJ,
   3. Slob MJ,
   4. et al

   . Relation between aneurysm volume, packing, and compaction in 145 cerebral aneurysms treated with coils. Radiology 2004;231:653–58

   CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
8. 8.↵
   1. Tamatani S,
   2. Ito Y,
   3. Abe H,
   4. et al

   . Evaluation of the stability of aneurysms after embolization using detachable coils: correlation between stability of aneurysms and embolized volume of aneurysms. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002;23:762–67

   Abstract/FREE Full Text
9. 9.↵
   1. Wootton DM,
   2. Ku DN

   . Fluid mechanics of vascular systems, diseases, and thrombosis. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2003;1:299–329
10. 10.↵
    1. Alnaes MS,
    2. Isaksen J,
    3. Mardal KA,
    4. et al

    . Computation of hemodynamics in the circle of Willis. Stroke 2007;38:2500–05

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
11. 11.↵
    1. White JB,
    2. Ken CG,
    3. Cloft HJ,
    4. et al

    . Coils in a nutshell: a review of coil physical properties. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:1242–46

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
12. 12.↵
    1. Narracott A,
    2. Smith S,
    3. Lawford P,
    4. et al

    . Development and validation of models for the investigation of blood clotting in idealized stenoses and cerebral aneurysms. J Artif Organs 2005;8:56–62

    CrossRefPubMed
13. 13.↵
    1. Schirmer CM,
    2. Malek AM

    . Critical influence of framing coil orientation on intra-aneurysmal and neck region hemodynamics in a sidewall aneurysm model. Neurosurgery 2010;67:1692–702

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
14. 14.↵
    1. Byun HS,
    2. Rhee K

    . CFD modeling of blood flow following coil embolization of aneurysms. Med Eng Phys 2004;26:755–61

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
15. 15.↵
    1. Cebral JR,
    2. Löhner R

    . Efficient simulation of blood flow past complex endovascular devices using an adaptive embedding technique. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2005;24:468–76

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
16. 16.↵
    1. Cha KS,
    2. Balaras E,
    3. Lieber BB,
    4. et al

    . Modeling the interaction of coils with the local blood flow after coil embolization of intracranial aneurysms. J Biomech Eng 2007;129:873–79

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
17. 17.↵
    1. Groden C,
    2. Eckert B,
    3. Ries T,
    4. et al

    . Angiographic follow-up of vertebrobasilar artery aneurysms treated with detachable coils. Neuroradiology 2003;45:435–40

    CrossRefPubMed
18. 18.↵
    1. Jou L-D,
    2. Saloner D,
    3. Higashida R

    . Determining intra-aneurysmal flow for coiled cerebral aneurysm with digital fluoroscopy. Biomed Eng Appl Basis Comm 2004;16:6
19. 19.↵
    1. Kakalis NM,
    2. Mitsos AP,
    3. Byrne JV,
    4. et al

    . The haemodynamics of endovascular aneurysm treatment: a computational modelling approach for estimating the influence of multiple coil deployment. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2008;27:814–24

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
20. 20.↵
    1. Goubergrits L,
    2. Thamsen B,
    3. Berthe A,
    4. et al

    . In vitro study of near-wall flow in a cerebral aneurysm model with and without coils. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:1521–28

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
21. 21.↵
    1. Sorteberg A,
    2. Sorteberg W,
    3. Aagaard BD,
    4. et al

    . Hemodynamic versus hydrodynamic effects of Guglielmi detachable coils on intra-aneurysmal pressure and flow at varying pulse rate and systemic pressure. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2004;25:1049–57

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
22. 22.↵
    1. Villa-Uriol MC,
    2. Larrabide I,
    3. Geers AJ,
    4. et al

    . AngioLab: integrated technology for patient-specific management of intracranial aneurysms. Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2010;1:6801–04
23. 23.↵
    1. Morales HG,
    2. Kim M,
    3. Villa-Uriol M-C,
    4. et al

    . Influence of coil packing rate and configuration on intracranial aneurysm hemodynamics. World Congress on Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, September 7–12, 2009, Munich, Germany 2009;25/4
24. 24.↵
    1. Morales HG,
    2. Larrabide I,
    3. Villa-Uriol M-C,
    4. et al

    . Towards the validation of a virtual coiling technique using a real versus a simulated bolus injection. Second International Conference on Computational & Mathematical Biomedical Engineering, March 30-April 1, 2011, Washington, DC; 512–15
25. 25.↵
    1. Malek AM,
    2. Alper SL,
    3. Izumo S

    . Hemodynamic shear stress and its role in atherosclerosis. JAMA 1999;282:2035–42

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
26. 26.↵
    1. Babiker MH,
    2. Gonzalez LF,
    3. Albuquerque F,
    4. et al

    . Quantitative effects of coil packing density on cerebral aneurysm fluid dynamics: an in vitro steady flow study. Ann Biomed Eng 2010;38:2293–301

    CrossRefPubMed
27. 27.↵
    1. Sorteberg A,
    2. Sorteberg W,
    3. Rappe A,
    4. et al

    . Effect of Guglielmi detachable coils on intraaneurysmal flow: experimental study in canines. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002;23:288–94

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
28. 28.↵
    1. Mori K,
    2. Nakao Y,
    3. Horinaka N,
    4. et al

    . Cerebral aneurysm regrowth and coil unraveling after incomplete Guglielmi detachable coil embolization: serial angiographical and histological findings. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo) 2003;43:293–97

    CrossRefPubMed
29. 29.↵
    1. Jiang J,
    2. Strother C

    . Computational fluid dynamics simulations of intracranial aneurysms at varying heart rates: a “patient-specific” study. J Biomech Eng 2009;131:091001
30. 30.↵
    1. Piotin M,
    2. Mandai S,
    3. Murphy KJ,
    4. et al

    . Dense packing of cerebral aneurysms: an in vitro study with detachable platinum coils. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2000;21:757–60

    Abstract/FREE Full Text
31. 31.↵
    1. Cebral JR,
    2. Castro MA,
    3. Appanaboyina S,
    4. et al

    . Efficient pipeline for image-based patient-specific analysis of cerebral aneurysm hemodynamics: technique and sensitivity. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 2005;24:457–67

    CrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
32. 32.↵
    1. Cebral JR,
    2. Mut F,
    3. Raschi M,
    4. et al

    . Aneurysm rupture following treatment with flow-diverting stents: computational hemodynamics analysis of treatment. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:27–33

    Abstract/FREE Full Text