Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis

Background Carotid atherosclerotic vascular disease significantly contributes to strokes, presenting a heightened risk of early recurrent ischemia. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has shown potential in predicting subsequent stroke recurrence in patients with carotid stenosis. Objective This stud...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Siyu Liu, Sai Wang, Hongan Tian, Junzhen Xue, Yuxin Guo, Jingxi Yang, Haobin Jiang, Jian bao Yang, Yang Zhang
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: PeerJ Inc. 2025-04-01
Series:PeerJ
Subjects:
Online Access:https://peerj.com/articles/19336.pdf
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849712296016740352
author Siyu Liu
Sai Wang
Hongan Tian
Junzhen Xue
Yuxin Guo
Jingxi Yang
Haobin Jiang
Jian bao Yang
Yang Zhang
author_facet Siyu Liu
Sai Wang
Hongan Tian
Junzhen Xue
Yuxin Guo
Jingxi Yang
Haobin Jiang
Jian bao Yang
Yang Zhang
author_sort Siyu Liu
collection DOAJ
description Background Carotid atherosclerotic vascular disease significantly contributes to strokes, presenting a heightened risk of early recurrent ischemia. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has shown potential in predicting subsequent stroke recurrence in patients with carotid stenosis. Objective This study aims to investigate the differences in computational time and accuracy of four key hemodynamic indices—wall shear stress (WSS), time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS), Oscillatory Shear Index (OSI), and relative residence time (RRT)—across different viscosity models, thereby providing optimal model selection for clinical cases and offering guidance for clinicians’ decision-making. Methods A three-dimensional vessel model was established using computed tomography angiography (CTA), followed by CFD simulations to calculate WSS, TAWSS, OSI, and RRT. The accuracy of the simulations was validated by comparing the results with those from Razavi et al. (10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.04.023). Numerical errors in different parameters under varying stenosis levels and viscosity models were analyzed. Results In the transient state, when degree of stenosis is 38%, 72%–84%, the performance difference between the two is less than 6%. For TAWSS, the difference is 0% when degree of stenosis is 12%, 18%, 26%, 54%, and 76%. For OSI, the difference is 0% when stenosis is 16%, 18%, 26%. For RRT, the difference between the two is 0% when degree of stenosis is 18% and 84%. WSS exhibited an increasing trend with higher degrees of stenosis. TAWSS demonstrated significant variation in moderate to severe stenosis, while OSI increased markedly in cases of moderate to severe stenosis. High RRT values in severely stenotic regions indicated a propensity for atherosclerotic lesion development. Conclusion This study systematically quantified the discrepancies between Newtonian and non-Newtonian blood viscosity models in predicting hemodynamic parameters across different degrees of carotid artery stenosis. Statistical analyses revealed significant differences between the two models in WSS, TAWSS, OSI, and RRT (p < 0.001 for all parameters). Newtonian models, while computationally efficient, overestimated TAWSS, OSI, and RRT while underestimating WSS, particularly in moderate to severe stenosis. In contrast, non-Newtonian models provided more physiologically accurate predictions, especially in regions with high shear stress variations. The results emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate viscosity models for CFD-based patient-specific risk assessment, particularly in stroke prediction, plaque evaluation, and surgical planning. Non-Newtonian models should be prioritized in high-risk patients where flow disturbances are more pronounced, whereas Newtonian models remain suitable for early screening and rapid assessments.
format Article
id doaj-art-8a658bbef26d4ad7836bfa0f12c8fc0a
institution DOAJ
issn 2167-8359
language English
publishDate 2025-04-01
publisher PeerJ Inc.
record_format Article
series PeerJ
spelling doaj-art-8a658bbef26d4ad7836bfa0f12c8fc0a2025-08-20T03:14:19ZengPeerJ Inc.PeerJ2167-83592025-04-0113e1933610.7717/peerj.19336Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosisSiyu Liu0Sai Wang1Hongan Tian2Junzhen Xue3Yuxin Guo4Jingxi Yang5Haobin Jiang6Jian bao Yang7Yang Zhang8School of Public Health and Nursing, Xianning Medical College, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaThe First Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaThe First Affiliated Hospital of Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaHealth Management Faculty, Xianning Vocational and Technical College, Xianning, ChinaSchool of Public Health and Nursing, Xianning Medical College, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaSchool of Public Health and Nursing, Xianning Medical College, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaSchool of Public Health and Nursing, Xianning Medical College, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaSchool of Public Health and Nursing, Xianning Medical College, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaInstitute of Engineering and Technology, Hubei University of Science and Technology, Xianning, ChinaBackground Carotid atherosclerotic vascular disease significantly contributes to strokes, presenting a heightened risk of early recurrent ischemia. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) has shown potential in predicting subsequent stroke recurrence in patients with carotid stenosis. Objective This study aims to investigate the differences in computational time and accuracy of four key hemodynamic indices—wall shear stress (WSS), time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS), Oscillatory Shear Index (OSI), and relative residence time (RRT)—across different viscosity models, thereby providing optimal model selection for clinical cases and offering guidance for clinicians’ decision-making. Methods A three-dimensional vessel model was established using computed tomography angiography (CTA), followed by CFD simulations to calculate WSS, TAWSS, OSI, and RRT. The accuracy of the simulations was validated by comparing the results with those from Razavi et al. (10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.04.023). Numerical errors in different parameters under varying stenosis levels and viscosity models were analyzed. Results In the transient state, when degree of stenosis is 38%, 72%–84%, the performance difference between the two is less than 6%. For TAWSS, the difference is 0% when degree of stenosis is 12%, 18%, 26%, 54%, and 76%. For OSI, the difference is 0% when stenosis is 16%, 18%, 26%. For RRT, the difference between the two is 0% when degree of stenosis is 18% and 84%. WSS exhibited an increasing trend with higher degrees of stenosis. TAWSS demonstrated significant variation in moderate to severe stenosis, while OSI increased markedly in cases of moderate to severe stenosis. High RRT values in severely stenotic regions indicated a propensity for atherosclerotic lesion development. Conclusion This study systematically quantified the discrepancies between Newtonian and non-Newtonian blood viscosity models in predicting hemodynamic parameters across different degrees of carotid artery stenosis. Statistical analyses revealed significant differences between the two models in WSS, TAWSS, OSI, and RRT (p < 0.001 for all parameters). Newtonian models, while computationally efficient, overestimated TAWSS, OSI, and RRT while underestimating WSS, particularly in moderate to severe stenosis. In contrast, non-Newtonian models provided more physiologically accurate predictions, especially in regions with high shear stress variations. The results emphasize the importance of selecting appropriate viscosity models for CFD-based patient-specific risk assessment, particularly in stroke prediction, plaque evaluation, and surgical planning. Non-Newtonian models should be prioritized in high-risk patients where flow disturbances are more pronounced, whereas Newtonian models remain suitable for early screening and rapid assessments.https://peerj.com/articles/19336.pdfHemodynamicsCarotid artery stenosisCarreau modelNewtonian fluidComputational fluid dynamics
spellingShingle Siyu Liu
Sai Wang
Hongan Tian
Junzhen Xue
Yuxin Guo
Jingxi Yang
Haobin Jiang
Jian bao Yang
Yang Zhang
Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis
PeerJ
Hemodynamics
Carotid artery stenosis
Carreau model
Newtonian fluid
Computational fluid dynamics
title Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis
title_full Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis
title_fullStr Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis
title_short Comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis
title_sort comparison of blood viscosity models in different degrees of carotid artery stenosis
topic Hemodynamics
Carotid artery stenosis
Carreau model
Newtonian fluid
Computational fluid dynamics
url https://peerj.com/articles/19336.pdf
work_keys_str_mv AT siyuliu comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT saiwang comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT hongantian comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT junzhenxue comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT yuxinguo comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT jingxiyang comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT haobinjiang comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT jianbaoyang comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis
AT yangzhang comparisonofbloodviscositymodelsindifferentdegreesofcarotidarterystenosis