Your browser doesn't support javascript.

Biblioteca Virtual em Saúde

Brasil

Home > Pesquisa > ()
Imprimir Exportar

Formato de exportação:

Exportar

Email
Adicionar mais destinatários
| |

Cardiovascular magnetic resonance compatible physical model of the left ventricle for multi-modality characterization of wall motion and hemodynamics.

Okafor, Ikechukwu U; Santhanakrishnan, Arvind; Chaffins, Brandon D; Mirabella, Lucia; Oshinski, John N; Yoganathan, Ajit P.
J Cardiovasc Magn Reson; 17: 51, 2015 Jun 26.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26112155

BACKGROUND:

The development of clinically applicable fluid-structure interaction (FSI) models of the left heart is inherently challenging when using in vivo cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR) data for validation, due to the lack of a well-controlled system where detailed measurements of the ventricular wall motion and flow field are available a priori. The purpose of this study was to (a) develop a clinically relevant, CMR-compatible left heart physical model; and (b) compare the left ventricular (LV) volume reconstructions and hemodynamic data obtained using CMR to laboratory-based experimental modalities.

METHODS:

The LV was constructed from optically clear flexible silicone rubber. The geometry was based off a healthy patient's LV geometry during peak systole. The LV phantom was attached to a left heart simulator consisting of an aorta, atrium, and systemic resistance and compliance elements. Experiments were conducted for heart rate of 70 bpm. Wall motion measurements were obtained using high speed stereo-photogrammetry (SP) and cine-CMR, while flow field measurements were obtained using digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV) and phase-contrast magnetic resonance (PC-CMR).

RESULTS:

The model reproduced physiologically accurate hemodynamics (aortic pressure = 120/80 mmHg; cardiac output = 3.5 L/min). DPIV and PC-CMR results of the center plane flow within the ventricle matched, both qualitatively and quantitatively, with flow from the atrium into the LV having a velocity of about 1.15 m/s for both modalities. The normalized LV volume through the cardiac cycle computed from CMR data matched closely to that from SP. The mean difference between CMR and SP was 5.5 ± 3.7%.

CONCLUSIONS:

The model presented here can thus be used for the purposes of (a) acquiring CMR data for validation of FSI simulations, (b) determining accuracy of cine-CMR reconstruction methods, and
Selo DaSilva