Non-invasive estimation of pressure drop across aortic coarctations: validation of 0D and 3D computational models with in vivo measurements
Nair, P.; Pfaller, M. R.; Dual, S. A.; McElhinney, D. B.; Ennis, D. B.; Marsden, A. L.
Show abstract
PurposeBlood pressure gradient ({Delta}P) across an aortic coarctation (CoA) is an important measurement to diagnose CoA severity and gauge treatment efficacy. Invasive cardiac catheterization is currently the gold-standard method for measuring blood pressure. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of{Delta} P estimates derived non-invasively using patient-specific 0D and 3D deformable wall simulations. MethodsMedical imaging and routine clinical measurements were used to create patient-specific models of patients with CoA (N=17). 0D simulations were performed first and used to tune boundary conditions and initialize 3D simulations.{Delta} P across the CoA estimated using both 0D and 3D simulations were compared to invasive catheter-based pressure measurements for validation. ResultsThe 0D simulations were extremely efficient ([~]15 secs computation time) compared to 3D simulations ([~]30 hrs computation time on a cluster). However, the 0D{Delta} P estimates, unsurprisingly, had larger mean errors when compared to catheterization than 3D estimates (12.1 {+/-} 9.9 mmHg vs 5.3 {+/-} 5.4 mmHg). In particular, the 0D model performance degraded in cases where the CoA was adjacent to a bifurcation. The 0D model classified patients with severe CoA requiring intervention (defined as{Delta} P[≥] 20 mmHg) with 76% accuracy and 3D simulations improved this to 88%. ConclusionOverall, a combined approach, using 0D models to efficiently tune and launch 3D models, offers the best combination of speed and accuracy for non-invasive classification of CoA severity.
Matching journals
The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Impact of residual intimal flap displacement post-TEVAR on TBAD haemodynamics in compliant, patient-specific CFD simulations informed by MRI 98%
- Effect of Sinotubular Junction Size on TAVR Leaflet Thrombosis: A Fluid-structure Interaction Analysis 97%
- Quantitative Assessment of Aortic Hemodynamics for Varying Left Ventricular Assist Device Outflow Graft Angles and Flow Pulsation 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Patient-specific analysis of bicuspid aortic valve hemodynamics using a fully coupled fluid-structure interaction (FSI) model 97%
- Deployment of a digital twin using the coupled momentum method for fluid-structure interaction: a case study for aortic aneurysm 97%
- Hemodynamics Indicates Differences Between Patients With And Without A Stroke Outcome After Left Ventricular Assist Device Implantation 97%
Similar papers in this journal
- In Silico Modeling of Transcatheter Heart Valve Oversizing and Ellipticity, Part I: Establishing Credibility of an Advanced Model 96%
- In Silico Modeling of Transcatheter Heart Valve Oversizing and Ellipticity, Part II: Effects on Leaflet Mechanics, Hemodynamics, and Stent Deflection Contributing to Thrombogenic Risk and Structural Degeneration 95%
- Computational hemodynamic indices to identify Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation degeneration 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- A coupled atrioventricular-aortic setup for in-vitro hemodynamic study of the systemic circulation: Design, Fabrication, and Physiological relevancy 96%
- Mechanical effects of MitraClip on leaflet stress and myocardial strain in functional mitral regurgitation: A finite element modeling study. 95%
- Development of a Novel Index to Characterise Arterial Dynamics Using Ultrasound Imaging 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Demonstration of Patient-Specific Simulations To Assess Left Atrial Appendage Thrombogenesis Risk 96%
- Predictive modeling of secondary pulmonary hypertension in left ventricular diastolic dysfunction 95%
- Feasibility of estimation of aortic wave intensity using non-invasive pressure recordings in the absence of flow velocity in man. 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.