3D-Ultrasound Based Mechanical and Geometrical Analysis of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms and Relationship to Growth

In vivo Multi-perspective 3D + t Ultrasound Imaging and Motion Estimation of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms

Time-resolved three-dimensional ultrasound (3D + t US) is a promising imaging modality for monitoring abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs), providing their 3D geometry and motion. The lateral contrast of US is poor, a well-documented drawback which multi-perspective (MP) imaging could resolve. This study aims to show the feasibility of in vivo multi-perspective 3D + t ultrasound imaging of AAAs for improving the image contrast and displacement accuracy. To achieve this, single-perspective (SP) aortic ultrasound images from three different angles were spatiotemporally registered and fused, and the displacements were compounded. The fused MP had a significantly higher wall-lumen contrast than the SP images, for both patients and volunteers (P < .001). MP radial displacements patterns are smoother than SP patterns in 67% of volunteers and 92% of patients. The MP images from three angles have a decreased tracking error (P < .001 for all participants), and an improved SNRe compared to two out of three SP images (P < .05). This study has shown the added value of MP 3D + t US, improving both image contrast and displacement accuracy in AAA imaging. This is a step toward using multiple or large transducers in the clinic to capture the 3D geometry and strain more accurately, for patient-specific characterization of AAAs.

On the feasibility of ultrasound Doppler-based personalized hemodynamic modeling of the abdominal aorta

BACKGROUND

Personalized modeling is a promising tool to improve abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture risk assessment. Computed tomography (CT) and quantitative flow (Q-flow) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are widely regarded as the gold standard for acquiring patient-specific geometry and velocity profiles, respectively. However, their frequent utilization is hindered by various drawbacks. Ultrasound is used extensively in current clinical practice and offers a safe, rapid and cost-effective method to acquire patient-specific geometries and velocity profiles. This study aims to extract and validate patient-specific velocity profiles from Doppler ultrasound and to examine the impact of the velocity profiles on computed hemodynamics.

METHODS

Pulsed-wave Doppler (PWD) and color Doppler (CD) data were successfully obtained for six volunteers and seven patients and employed to extract the flow pulse and velocity profile over the cross-section, respectively. The US flow pulses and velocity profiles as well as generic Womersley profiles were compared to the MRI velocities and flows. Additionally, CFD simulations were performed to examine the combined impact of the velocity profile and flow pulse.

RESULTS

Large discrepancies were found between the US and MRI velocity profiles over the cross-sections, with differences for US in the same range as for the Womersley profile. Differences in flow pulses revealed that US generally performs best in terms of maximum flow, forward flow and ratios between forward and backward flow, whereas it often overestimates the backward flow. Both spatial patterns and magnitude of the computed hemodynamics were considerably affected by the prescribed velocity boundary conditions. Larger errors and smaller differences between the US and generic CFD cases were observed for patients compared to volunteers.

CONCLUSION

These results show that it is feasible to acquire the patient-specific flow pulse from PWD data, provided that the PWD acquisition could be performed proximal to the aneurysm region, and resulted in a triphasic flow pattern. However, obtaining the patient-specific velocity profile over the cross-section using CD data is not reliable. For the volunteers, utilizing the US flow profile instead of the generic flow profile generally resulted in improved performance, whereas this was the case in more than half of the cases for the patients.

One-year follow-up after active aortic aneurysm sac treatment with shape memory polymer devices during endovascular aneurysm repair

OBJECTIVE

To determine the safety and efficacy of treating abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) sacs with polyurethane shape memory polymer (SMP) devices during endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR), using a technique to fully treat the target lumen after endograft placement (aortic flow volume minus the endograft volume). SMP devices self-expand in the sac to form a porous scaffold that supports thrombosis throughout its structure.

METHODS

Two identical prospective, multicenter, single-arm studies were conducted in New Zealand and the Netherlands. The study population was adult candidates for elective EVAR of an infrarenal AAA (diameter of ≥55 mm in men and ≥50 mm in women). Key exclusion criteria were an inability to adequately seal a common iliac artery aneurysm, patent sac feeding vessels of >4 mm, and a target lumen volume of <20 mL or >135 mL. Target lumen volumes were estimated by subtracting endograft volumes from preprocedural imaging-based flow lumen volumes. SMP devices were delivered immediately after endograft deployment via a 6F sheath jailed in a bowed position in the sac. The primary efficacy end point was technical success, defined as filling the actual target lumen volume with fully expanded SMP at the completion of the procedure. Secondary efficacy outcome measures during follow-up were the change in sac volume and diameter, rate of type II endoleak and type I or III endoleaks, and the rate of open repair and related reinterventions, with data collection at 30 days, 6 months, and 1 year (to date). Baseline sac volumes and diameters for change in sac size analyses were determined from 30-day imaging studies. Baseline and follow-up volumes were normalized by subtraction of the endograft volume.

RESULTS

Of 34 patients treated with SMP devices and followed per protocol, 33 patients were evaluable at 1 year. Preprocedural aneurysm volume was 181.4 mL (95% confidence interval [CI], 150.7-212.1 mL) and preprocedural aneurysm diameter was 60.8 mm (95% CI, 57.8-63.9 mm). The target lumen volume was 56.3 mL (95% CI, 46.9-65.8 mL). Technical success was 100% and the ratio of SMP fully expanded volume to estimated target lumen volume was 1.4 ± 0.3. Baseline normalized sac volume and diameter were 140.7 mL (95% CI, 126.6-154.9 mL) and 61.0 mm (95% CI, 59.7-62.3 mm). The adjusted mean percentage change in normalized volume at 1 year was -28.8% (95% CI, -35.3 to -22.3%; P < .001). The adjusted mean change in sac diameter at 1 year was -5.9 mm (95% CI, -7.5 to -4.4 mm; P < .001). At 1 year, 81.8% of patients (95% CI, 64.5%-93.0%) achieved a ≥10% decrease in normalized volume and 57.6% of patients (95% CI, 39.2%-74.5%) achieved a ≥5 mm decrease in diameter. No device- or study procedure-related major adverse events occurred through 1 year after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of AAA sacs with SMP devices during EVAR resulted in significant sac volume and diameter regression at 1 year with an acceptable safety profile in this prospective study.