Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields
The pressure drop over a pathological vessel section can be used as an important diagnostic indicator. However, it cannot be measured non-invasively. Multiple approaches for pressure reconstruction based on velocity information are available. Regarding in-vivo data introducing uncertainty these appr...
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
De Gruyter
2017-09-01
|
| Series: | Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2017-0064 |
| _version_ | 1797848756684587008 |
|---|---|
| author | Manthey Samuel Voß Samuel Roloff Christoph Stucht Daniel Thévenin Dominique Janiga Gábor Berg Philipp |
| author_facet | Manthey Samuel Voß Samuel Roloff Christoph Stucht Daniel Thévenin Dominique Janiga Gábor Berg Philipp |
| author_sort | Manthey Samuel |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | The pressure drop over a pathological vessel section can be used as an important diagnostic indicator. However, it cannot be measured non-invasively. Multiple approaches for pressure reconstruction based on velocity information are available. Regarding in-vivo data introducing uncertainty these approaches may not be robust and therefore validation is required. Within this study, three independent methods to calculate pressure losses from velocity fields were implemented and compared: A three dimensional and a one dimensional method based on the Pressure Poisson Equation (PPE) as well as an approach based on the work-energy equation for incompressible fluids (WERP). In order to evaluate the different approaches, phantoms from pure Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations and in-vivo PC-MRI measurements were used. The comparison of all three methods reveals a good agreement with respect to the CFD pressure solutions for simple geometries. However, for more complex geometries all approaches lose accuracy. Hence, this study demonstrates the need for a careful selection of an appropriate pressure reconstruction algorithm. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T18:33:12Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-9b91ad549d7a408bb082080ac28b5835 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2364-5504 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T18:33:12Z |
| publishDate | 2017-09-01 |
| publisher | De Gruyter |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering |
| spelling | doaj.art-9b91ad549d7a408bb082080ac28b58352023-04-11T17:07:13ZengDe GruyterCurrent Directions in Biomedical Engineering2364-55042017-09-013230931210.1515/cdbme-2017-0064cdbme-2017-0064Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fieldsManthey Samuel0Voß Samuel1Roloff Christoph2Stucht Daniel3Thévenin Dominique4Janiga Gábor5Berg Philipp6Department of Simulation and Graphics, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, GermanyDepartment of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, GermanyDepartment of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, GermanyDepartment of Biomedical Magnetic Resonance, University of Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39016 Magdeburg, GermanyDepartment of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, GermanyDepartment of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, GermanyDepartment of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, GermanyThe pressure drop over a pathological vessel section can be used as an important diagnostic indicator. However, it cannot be measured non-invasively. Multiple approaches for pressure reconstruction based on velocity information are available. Regarding in-vivo data introducing uncertainty these approaches may not be robust and therefore validation is required. Within this study, three independent methods to calculate pressure losses from velocity fields were implemented and compared: A three dimensional and a one dimensional method based on the Pressure Poisson Equation (PPE) as well as an approach based on the work-energy equation for incompressible fluids (WERP). In order to evaluate the different approaches, phantoms from pure Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations and in-vivo PC-MRI measurements were used. The comparison of all three methods reveals a good agreement with respect to the CFD pressure solutions for simple geometries. However, for more complex geometries all approaches lose accuracy. Hence, this study demonstrates the need for a careful selection of an appropriate pressure reconstruction algorithm.https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2017-0064pressure droppressure reconstructionpressure poisson equation (ppe) |
| spellingShingle | Manthey Samuel Voß Samuel Roloff Christoph Stucht Daniel Thévenin Dominique Janiga Gábor Berg Philipp Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering pressure drop pressure reconstruction pressure poisson equation (ppe) |
| title | Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields |
| title_full | Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields |
| title_fullStr | Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields |
| title_short | Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields |
| title_sort | comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields |
| topic | pressure drop pressure reconstruction pressure poisson equation (ppe) |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2017-0064 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT mantheysamuel comparisonofpressurereconstructionapproachesbasedonmeasuredandsimulatedvelocityfields AT voßsamuel comparisonofpressurereconstructionapproachesbasedonmeasuredandsimulatedvelocityfields AT roloffchristoph comparisonofpressurereconstructionapproachesbasedonmeasuredandsimulatedvelocityfields AT stuchtdaniel comparisonofpressurereconstructionapproachesbasedonmeasuredandsimulatedvelocityfields AT thevenindominique comparisonofpressurereconstructionapproachesbasedonmeasuredandsimulatedvelocityfields AT janigagabor comparisonofpressurereconstructionapproachesbasedonmeasuredandsimulatedvelocityfields AT bergphilipp comparisonofpressurereconstructionapproachesbasedonmeasuredandsimulatedvelocityfields |