Comparison of 1D and 3D Models for the Estimation of Fractional Flow Reserve

被引:0
作者
P. J. Blanco
C. A. Bulant
L. O. Müller
G. D. Maso Talou
C. Guedes Bezerra
P. A. Lemos
R. A. Feijóo
机构
[1] National Laboratory for Scientific Computing,Department of Interventional Cardiology
[2] LNCC/MCTIC,undefined
[3] Av. Getúlio Vargas,undefined
[4] 333,undefined
[5] Heart Institute (InCor) and the University of São Paulo Medical School,undefined
[6] INCT-MACC Instituto Nacional de Ciência e Tecnologia em Medicina Assistida por Computação Científica,undefined
来源
Scientific Reports | / 8卷
关键词
Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR); Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA); IVUS Images; Rest Coronary Blood Flow (RCBF); Hyperemic Coronary Blood Flow (HCBF);
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
In this work we propose to validate the predictive capabilities of one-dimensional (1D) blood flow models with full three-dimensional (3D) models in the context of patient-specific coronary hemodynamics in hyperemic conditions. Such conditions mimic the state of coronary circulation during the acquisition of the Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) index. Demonstrating that 1D models accurately reproduce FFR estimates obtained with 3D models has implications in the approach to computationally estimate FFR. To this end, a sample of 20 patients was employed from which 29 3D geometries of arterial trees were constructed, 9 obtained from coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and 20 from intra-vascular ultrasound (IVUS). For each 3D arterial model, a 1D counterpart was generated. The same outflow and inlet pressure boundary conditions were applied to both (3D and 1D) models. In the 1D setting, pressure losses at stenoses and bifurcations were accounted for through specific lumped models. Comparisons between 1D models (FFR1D) and 3D models (FFR3D) were performed in terms of predicted FFR value. Compared to FFR3D, FFR1D resulted with a difference of 0.00 ± 0.03 and overall predictive capability AUC, Acc, Spe, Sen, PPV and NPV of 0.97, 0.98, 0.90, 0.99, 0.82, and 0.99, with an FFR threshold of 0.8. We conclude that inexpensive FFR1D simulations can be reliably used as a surrogate of demanding FFR3D computations.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 73 条
  • [1] Pijls NH(1996)Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses New England Journal of Medicine 334 1703-1708
  • [2] De Bruyne B(2000)Pressure-Derived Fractional Flow Reserve to Assess Serial Epicardial Stenoses: Theoretical Basis and Animal Validation Circulation 101 1840-1847
  • [3] Pijls NH(2007)Percutaneous Coronary Intervention of Functionally Nonsignificant Stenosis Journal of the American College of Cardiology 49 2105-2111
  • [4] Tonino PAL(2009)Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention The New England journal of medicine 360 213-224
  • [5] van Nunen LX(2015)Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guidance of PCI in patients with multivessel coronary artery disease (FAME): 5-year follow-up of a randomised controlled trial The Lancet 386 1853-1860
  • [6] Taylor CA(2013)Computational Fluid Dynamics Applied to Cardiac Computed Tomography for Noninvasive Quantification of Fractional Flow Reserve Journal of the American College of Cardiology 61 2233-2241
  • [7] Fonte TA(2013)Virtual Fractional Flow Reserve From Coronary Angiography: Modeling the Significance of Coronary Lesions JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions 6 149-157
  • [8] Min JK(2016)Assessing Computational Fractional Flow Reserve From Optical Coherence Tomography in Patients With Intermediate Coronary Stenosis in the Left Anterior Descending Artery Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions 9 e003613-1997
  • [9] Morris PD(2011)Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Coronary Stenoses by Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve Computed From Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiograms Journal of the American College of Cardiology 58 1989-1096
  • [10] Ha J(2012)Diagnostic Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve From Anatomic CT Angiography JAMA 308 1237-138