![]() ![]() ![]() Steady-streaming in the cranial SAS was ~ 50× smaller than in the spinal SAS for both cases. Neurapheresis therapy was found to have a greater impact on steady-streaming compared to lumbar drain. Tracer clearance was most rapid between the catheter aspiration and return ports. ResultsĪfter 24-h, tracer concentration was reduced to 4.9% under Neurapheresis therapy compared to 6.5% under lumbar drain. ![]() Quantitative comparison of numerical and in vitro results was performed by linear regression of spatial–temporal tracer concentration over 24-h. To help verify CFD results, an optically clear in vitro CSF model was constructed with fluorescein used as a blood surrogate. Spatial–temporal tracer concentration was quantified based on time-average steady-streaming velocities throughout the domain under Neurapheresis therapy and lumbar drain. The dura and spinal cord geometry were considered to be stationary. Subject-specific oscillatory CSF flow was applied at the model inlet. Blood was modeled as a bulk fluid phase within CSF with a 10% initial tracer concentration and identical viscosity and density as CSF. Neurapheresis flow aspiration and return rate was 2.0 and 1.8 mL/min, versus 0.2 mL/min drainage for lumbar drain. The Neurapheresis catheter geometry was added to the model within the spinal subarachnoid space (SAS). MethodsĪ subject-specific multiphase CFD model of CSF system-wide solute transport was constructed based on MRI measurements. We formulated a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model to investigate the impact of a dual-lumen catheter-based CSF filtration system, called Neurapheresis™ therapy, on blood removal from CSF compared to lumbar drain. Blood removal from cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) in post-subarachnoid hemorrhage patients may reduce the risk of related secondary brain injury. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |