Relative pressure estimation from 4D flow MRI using generalized Bernoulli equation in a phantom model of arterial stenosis

Objective Arterial stenosis is a significant cardiovascular disease requiring accurate estimation of the pressure gradients for determining hemodynamic significance. In this paper, we propose Generalized Bernoulli Equation (GBE) utilizing interpolated-based method to estimate relative pressures usin...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Magma (New York, N.Y.) Vol. 35; no. 5; pp. 733 - 748
Main Authors:	Kazemi, Amirkhosro, Padgett, Daniel A., Callahan, Sean, Stoddard, Marcus, Amini, Amir A.
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	Cham Springer International Publishing 01-10-2022
Subjects:	Basic Science - Engineering Biomedical Engineering and Bioengineering Computer Appl. in Life Sciences Health Informatics Imaging Medicine Medicine & Public Health Radiology Research Article Solid State Physics CFD Bernoulli method 4D flow MRI Unsteady flow Pressure
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	Objective Arterial stenosis is a significant cardiovascular disease requiring accurate estimation of the pressure gradients for determining hemodynamic significance. In this paper, we propose Generalized Bernoulli Equation (GBE) utilizing interpolated-based method to estimate relative pressures using streamlines and pathlines from 4D Flow MRI. Methods 4D Flow MRI data in a stenotic phantom model and computational fluid dynamics simulated velocities generated under identical flow conditions were processed by Generalized Bernoulli Equation (GBE), Reduced Bernoulli Equations (RBE), as well as the Simple Bernoulli Equation (SBE) which is clinically prevalent. Pressures derived from 4D flow MRI and noise corrupted CFD velocities were compared with pressures generated directly with CFD as well as pressures obtained using Millar catheters under identical flow conditions. Results It was found that SBE and RBE methods underestimated the relative pressure for lower flow rates while overestimating the relative pressure at higher flow rates. Specifically, compared to the reference pressure, SBE underestimated the maximum relative pressure by 22 % for a pulsatile flow data with peak flow rate Q max = 80 ml s and overestimated by around 40 % when Q max = 130 ml s . In contrast, for GBE method the relative pressure values were overestimated by 15 % with Q max = 80 ml s and around 10 % with Q max = 130 ml s . Conclusion GBE methods showed robust performance to additive image noise compared to other methods. Our findings indicate that GBE pressure estimation over pathlines attains the highest level of accuracy compared to GBE over streamlines, and the SBE and RBE methods.
Bibliography:	ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23
ISSN:	1352-8661 1352-8661
DOI:	10.1007/s10334-022-01001-x