TY - JOUR
T1 - The Computational Fluid Dynamics Rupture Challenge 2013 - Phase II
T2 - Variability of Hemodynamic Simulations in Two Intracranial Aneurysms
AU - Berg, Philipp
AU - Roloff, Christoph
AU - Beuing, Oliver
AU - Voss, Samuel
AU - Sugiyama, Shin Ichiro
AU - Aristokleous, Nicolas
AU - Anayiotos, Andreas S.
AU - Ashton, Neil
AU - Revell, Alistair
AU - Bressloff, Neil W.
AU - Brown, Alistair G.
AU - Chung, Bong Jae
AU - Cebral, Juan R.
AU - Copelli, Gabriele
AU - Fu, Wenyu
AU - Qiao, Aike
AU - Geers, Arjan J.
AU - Hodis, Simona
AU - Dragomir-Daescu, Dan
AU - Nordahl, Emily
AU - Suzen, Yildirim Bora
AU - Khan, Muhammad Owais
AU - Valen-Sendstad, Kristian
AU - Kono, Kenichi
AU - Menon, Prahlad G.
AU - Albal, Priti G.
AU - Mierka, Otto
AU - Münster, Raphael
AU - Morales, Hernán G.
AU - Bonnefous, Odile
AU - Osman, Jan
AU - Goubergrits, Leonid
AU - Pallares, Jordi
AU - Cito, Salvatore
AU - Passalacqua, Alberto
AU - Piskin, Senol
AU - Pekkan, Kerem
AU - Ramalho, Susana
AU - Marques, Nelson
AU - Sanchi, Stéphane
AU - Schumacher, Kristopher R.
AU - Sturgeon, Jess
AU - Švihlová, Helena
AU - Hron, Jaroslav
AU - Usera, Gabriel
AU - Mendina, Mariana
AU - Xiang, Jianping
AU - Meng, Hui
AU - Steinman, David A.
AU - Janiga, Gabor
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 by ASME.
PY - 2015/12/1
Y1 - 2015/12/1
N2 - With the increased availability of computational resources, the past decade has seen a rise in the use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for medical applications. There has been an increase in the application of CFD to attempt to predict the rupture of intracranial aneurysms, however, while many hemodynamic parameters can be obtained from these computations, to date, no consistent methodology for the prediction of the rupture has been identified. One particular challenge to CFD is that many factors contribute to its accuracy; the mesh resolution and spatial/temporal discretization can alone contribute to a variation in accuracy. This failure to identify the importance of these factors and identify a methodology for the prediction of ruptures has limited the acceptance of CFD among physicians for rupture prediction. The International CFD Rupture Challenge 2013 seeks to comment on the sensitivity of these various CFD assumptions to predict the rupture by undertaking a comparison of the rupture and blood-flow predictions from a wide range of independent participants utilizing a range of CFD approaches. Twenty-six groups from 15 countries took part in the challenge. Participants were provided with surface models of two intracranial aneurysms and asked to carry out the corresponding hemodynamics simulations, free to choose their own mesh, solver, and temporal discretization. They were requested to submit velocity and pressure predictions along the centerline and on specified planes. The first phase of the challenge, described in a separate paper, was aimed at predicting which of the two aneurysms had previously ruptured and where the rupture site was located. The second phase, described in this paper, aims to assess the variability of the solutions and the sensitivity to the modeling assumptions. Participants were free to choose boundary conditions in the first phase, whereas they were prescribed in the second phase but all other CFD modeling parameters were not prescribed. In order to compare the computational results of one representative group with experimental results, steady-flow measurements using particle image velocimetry (PIV) were carried out in a silicone model of one of the provided aneurysms. Approximately 80% of the participating groups generated similar results. Both velocity and pressure computations were in good agreement with each other for cycle-averaged and peaksystolic predictions. Most apparent "outliers" (results that stand out of the collective) were observed to have underestimated velocity levels compared to the majority of solutions, but nevertheless identified comparable flow structures. In only two cases, the results deviate by over 35% from the mean solution of all the participants. Results of steady CFD simulations of the representative group and PIV experiments were in good agreement. The study demonstrated that while a range of numerical schemes, mesh resolution, and solvers was used, similar flow predictions were observed in the majority of cases. To further validate the computational results, it is suggested that time-dependent measurements should be conducted in the future. However, it is recognized that this study does not include the biological aspects of the aneurysm, which needs to be considered to be able to more precisely identify the specific rupture risk of an intracranial aneurysm.
AB - With the increased availability of computational resources, the past decade has seen a rise in the use of computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for medical applications. There has been an increase in the application of CFD to attempt to predict the rupture of intracranial aneurysms, however, while many hemodynamic parameters can be obtained from these computations, to date, no consistent methodology for the prediction of the rupture has been identified. One particular challenge to CFD is that many factors contribute to its accuracy; the mesh resolution and spatial/temporal discretization can alone contribute to a variation in accuracy. This failure to identify the importance of these factors and identify a methodology for the prediction of ruptures has limited the acceptance of CFD among physicians for rupture prediction. The International CFD Rupture Challenge 2013 seeks to comment on the sensitivity of these various CFD assumptions to predict the rupture by undertaking a comparison of the rupture and blood-flow predictions from a wide range of independent participants utilizing a range of CFD approaches. Twenty-six groups from 15 countries took part in the challenge. Participants were provided with surface models of two intracranial aneurysms and asked to carry out the corresponding hemodynamics simulations, free to choose their own mesh, solver, and temporal discretization. They were requested to submit velocity and pressure predictions along the centerline and on specified planes. The first phase of the challenge, described in a separate paper, was aimed at predicting which of the two aneurysms had previously ruptured and where the rupture site was located. The second phase, described in this paper, aims to assess the variability of the solutions and the sensitivity to the modeling assumptions. Participants were free to choose boundary conditions in the first phase, whereas they were prescribed in the second phase but all other CFD modeling parameters were not prescribed. In order to compare the computational results of one representative group with experimental results, steady-flow measurements using particle image velocimetry (PIV) were carried out in a silicone model of one of the provided aneurysms. Approximately 80% of the participating groups generated similar results. Both velocity and pressure computations were in good agreement with each other for cycle-averaged and peaksystolic predictions. Most apparent "outliers" (results that stand out of the collective) were observed to have underestimated velocity levels compared to the majority of solutions, but nevertheless identified comparable flow structures. In only two cases, the results deviate by over 35% from the mean solution of all the participants. Results of steady CFD simulations of the representative group and PIV experiments were in good agreement. The study demonstrated that while a range of numerical schemes, mesh resolution, and solvers was used, similar flow predictions were observed in the majority of cases. To further validate the computational results, it is suggested that time-dependent measurements should be conducted in the future. However, it is recognized that this study does not include the biological aspects of the aneurysm, which needs to be considered to be able to more precisely identify the specific rupture risk of an intracranial aneurysm.
KW - challenge
KW - computational fluid dynamics
KW - intracranial aneurysm
KW - variability
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84946901000&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1115/1.4031794
DO - 10.1115/1.4031794
M3 - Article
C2 - 26473395
AN - SCOPUS:84946901000
SN - 0148-0731
VL - 137
JO - Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
JF - Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
IS - 12
M1 - 121008
ER -