Premium
MRI‐based computational hemodynamics in patients with aortic coarctation using the lattice Boltzmann methods: Clinical validation study
Author(s) -
Mirzaee Hanieh,
Henn Thomas,
Krause Mathias J.,
Goubergrits Leonid,
Schumann Christian,
Neugebauer Mathias,
Kuehne Titus,
Preusser Tobias,
Hennemuth Anja
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
journal of magnetic resonance imaging
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.563
H-Index - 160
eISSN - 1522-2586
pISSN - 1053-1807
DOI - 10.1002/jmri.25366
Subject(s) - hemodynamics , lattice boltzmann methods , coarctation of the aorta , pressure drop , confidence interval , medicine , mathematics , aorta , cardiology , radiology , physics , mechanics
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. Level of Evidence: 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;45:139–146.