Patient-Specific Vascular Modeling - Microsurgery: Advances, Simulations, and Applications - page 105

Utility of membranous vascular model: Figure 3.34 makes the
comparison between treatment results for both solid vascular model
and membranous vascular model constructed for representative
case No. 2. As a result of this evaluation, it was conirmed that the
appropriate coil was different for these two models although these
models reproduce the same aneurysm. The major speciication of
the coil appropriate to both models is summarized in Table 3.3. This
result indicates that the reproduction of the vascular deformation
is indispensable in embolization simulation, as well as the result of
low analysis. Here, the difference brought by these vascular models
structure, solid and membranous, has a deep meaning. For instance,
this result shows that it is improper to assume the rigid vascular
structure for hemodynamic analysis, although researchers engage in
numerical blood low analysis reports analysis result made with this
precondition.

a) b)

Figure 3.34 Comparison between the embolism treatment results for
both solid vascular model and membranous vascular model
constructed for representative case No. 2 model. (a) Treatment
result for solid vascular model. (b) Treatment result for
membranous vascular model.

Table 3.3 The main speciication of the coil selected through the

embolization simulation for representative case No. 2 model

Trial ID Dimension Suitable diameter (mm)

Solid Model 2D 5.0

Membranous Model 2D 8.0

3.11.4 Aneurism Clipping Simulation

Aneurism clipping treatment simulation performance was evaluated
with prepared vascular model of case No. 4, under the experiment
setup similar to that for coil deploy experiment. Figure 3.35a shows