4.5 Article

A CombinedIn Vivo,In Vitro,In SilicoApproach for Patient-Specific Haemodynamic Studies of Aortic Dissection

期刊

ANNALS OF BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING
卷 48, 期 12, 页码 2950-2964

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10439-020-02603-z

关键词

Aortic dissection; Particle image velocimetry; Blood flow; Computational fluid dynamics; Pulsatile flow; Patient-specific

资金

  1. Wellcome/EPSRC Centre for Interventional and Surgical Sciences (WEISS) [203145Z/16/Z]
  2. British Heart Foundation [GA FS/15/22/31356]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The optimal treatment of Type-B aortic dissection (AD) is still a subject of debate, with up to 50% of the cases developing late-term complications requiring invasive intervention. A better understanding of the patient-specific haemodynamic features of AD can provide useful insights on disease progression and support clinical management. In this work, a novelin vitroandin silicoframework to perform personalised studies of AD, informed by non-invasive clinical data, is presented. A Type-B AD was investigatedin silicousing computational fluid dynamics (CFD) andin vitroby means of a state-of-the-art mock circulatory loop and particle image velocimetry (PIV). Both models not only reproduced the anatomical features of the patient, but also imposed physiologically-accurate and personalised boundary conditions. Experimental flow rate and pressure waveforms, as well as detailed velocity fields acquiredviaPIV, are extensively compared against numerical predictions at different locations in the aorta, showing excellent agreement. This work demonstrates how experimental and numerical tools can be developed in synergy to accurately reproduce patient-specific AD blood flow. The combined platform presented herein constitutes a powerful tool for advanced haemodynamic studies for a range of vascular conditions, allowing not only the validation of CFD models, but also clinical decision support, surgical planning as well as medical device innovation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据