Shear stress metrics associated with pro-atherogenic high-risk anatomical features in a carotid artery bifurcation model.

Background: Diseases associated with atherosclerotic plaques in the carotid artery are a major cause of deaths in the United States. Blood-flow-induced shear-stresses are known to trigger plaque formation. Prior literature suggests that the internal carotid artery sinus is prone to atherosclerosis, but there is limited understanding of why only certain patients are predisposed towards plaque formation.

Methods: We computationally investigate the effect of vessel geometry on wall-shear-stress distribution by comparing flowfields and wall-shear-stress-metrics between a low-risk and a novel predisposed high-risk carotid artery bifurcation anatomy. Both models were developed based on clinical risk estimations and patient-averaged anatomical features. The high-risk geometry has a larger internal carotid artery branching angle and a lower internal-to-carotid-artery-diameter-ratio. A patient-averaged physiological carotid artery inflow waveform is used.

Findings: The high-risk geometry experiences stronger flow separation in the sinus. Furthermore, it experiences a more equal flow split at the bifurcation, thereby reducing internal carotid artery flowrate and increasing atherosclerosis-prone low-velocity areas. Lowest time-averaged-wall-shear-stresses are present at the sinus outer wall, where plaques are often found, for both geometries. The high-risk geometry has significantly high, unfavorable oscillatory-shear-index values not found in the low-risk geometry. High oscillatory-shear-index areas are located at the vessels outside walls distal to the bifurcation and on the sinus wall.

Interpretation: These results highlight the effectiveness of oscillatory-shear-index, to augment classical time-averaged-wall-shear-stress, in evaluating pro-atherogenic geometry features. Furthermore, the flow split at the bifurcation is a promising clinical indicator for atherosclerosis risk as it can be directly accessed using clinical imaging, whereas shear-stress-metrics cannot.