Computational modeling of cerebral aneurysms, derived from clinical 3D angiography, has become widespread over the past 15 years. While such "image-based" or "patient-specific" models have shown promise for the assessment of rupture risk, much debate remains about their reliability in light of necessary modeling assumptions and incomplete or uncertain model input parameters derived from the clinic. The aims of this review were to walk through the various steps of this so-called patient-specific modeling pipeline and to highlight evidence supporting those steps that we can or cannot rely on. The relative importance of the different sources of error and variability on hemodynamic predictions is summarized, with recommendations to standardize for those that can be avoided and to pay closer attention those to that cannot.
Keywords: 3DRA = 3D rotational angiography; CFD = computational fluid dynamics; ICA = internal carotid artery; MCA = middle cerebral artery; OSI = oscillatory shear index; TAWSS = time-averaged wall shear stress; WSS = wall shear stress; computational fluid dynamics; hemodynamics; image-based modeling; wall shear stress; wall stress.