4.7 Article

MRI-Based Computational Hemodynamics in Patients With Aortic Coarctation Using the Lattice Boltzmann Methods: Clinical Validation Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Volume 45, Issue 1, Pages 139-146

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.25366

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. EU project CARDIOPROOF (European Commission) [ICT-2013.5.2, 611232]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To introduce a scheme based on a recent technique in computational hemodynamics, known as the lattice Boltzmann methods (LBM), to noninvasively measure pressure gradients in patients with a coarctation of the aorta (CoA). To provide evidence on the accuracy of the proposed scheme, the computed pressure drop values are compared against those obtained using the reference standard method of catheterization. Materials and Methods: Pre-and posttreatment LBM-based pressure gradients for 12 patients with CoA were simulated for the time point of peak systole using the open source library OpenLB. Four-dimensional (4D) flow-sensitive phase-contrast MRI at 1.5 Tesla was used to acquire flow and to setup the simulation. The vascular geometry was reconstructed using 3D whole-heart MRI. Patients underwent pre-and postinterventional pressure catheterization as a reference standard. Results: There is a significant linear correlation between the pretreatment catheter pressure drops and those computed based on the LBM simulation, r=.85, P <.001. The bias was -0.58 +/- 4.1 mmHg and was not significant (P=0.64) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of -3.22 to 2.06. For the posttreatment results, the bias was larger and at -2.54 +/- 3.53 mmHg with a 95% CI of -0.17 to -4.91 mmHg. Conclusion: The results indicate a reasonable agreement between the simulation results and the catheter measurements. LBM-based computational hemodynamics can be considered as an alternative to more traditional computational fluid dynamics schemes for noninvasive pressure calculations and can assist in diagnosis and therapy planning.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available