Variability in Intracranial Vessel Diameters and Considerations for Neurovascular Models: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis

Abstract

Background In vitro experiments are critical for understanding the impact of medical devices and techniques on blood vessels and blood flow. However, their interpretation is often limited by anatomical models’ inability to capture the wide range of vessel sizes observed in real‐world practice. The current study aims to address this limitation by describing the distribution of vessel diameters in a real‐world population. Methods This systematic literature review using the PubMed database analyzed cerebral vessel diameters in patients from 2000 to 2022. The diameter measurements of various vessels within the neurovasculature were extracted. Random‐effects meta‐analyses were performed to synthesize vessel diameters across studies. Predicted distributions were generated from the meta‐analytical results. Results Seventy‐six studies were included in the analysis. The M1 segment, internal carotid artery (cervical and communicating segments), A1 segment, V2 segment, V4 segment, and basilar artery had sufficient data for generating predicted distributions of vessel diameters. Predicted mean diameters were as follows: M1 segment, 2.55 ± 0.42 mm (95th interpercentile range [IPR]: 1.71–3.38); internal carotid artery‐cervical segment, 4.74 ± 0.64 mm (95th IPR: 3.49–5.99); internal carotid artery‐communicating segment, 3.40 ± 0.64 mm (95th IPR: 2.15–4.66); A1 segment, 1.89 ± 0.34 mm (95th IPR: 1.23–2.55); V2 segment, 3.36 ± 0.67 mm (95th IPR: 2.05–4.67); V4 segment, 2.42 ± 0.74 mm (95th IPR: 0.98–3.86); and basilar artery, 2.96 ± 0.52 mm (95th IPR: 1.94–3.97). Conclusion Cerebral vessel diameter measurements can vary substantially due to patient‐specific factors and imaging techniques. This literature review highlights the diverse range of vessel sizes observed in different patient populations, emphasizing the need for anatomical models that accurately represent clinical observations.