Why the study?
Computing transstenotic pressure drop evaluates the functional significance of coronary stenosis, but the capability of reduced-order hydrodynamic models compared with comprehensive 3D CFD simulations required evaluation.
Do reduced order models accurately compute transstenotic pressure drop compared to 3D CFD simulations in coronary artery stenosis?
Do reduced order models accurately compute transstenotic pressure drop compared to 3D CFD simulations in coronary artery stenosis?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
An optimized algebraic formula can accurately predict transstenotic pressure drop in coronary arteries compared to complex 3D CFD models, provided it accounts for viscous dissipation and flow separation.
The efficacy of reduced order modeling for transstenotic pressure drop in the coronary arteries is presented. Coronary artery disease is a leading cause of death worldwide and the computation of pressure drop in the coronary arteries has become a standard for evaluating the functional significance of a coronary stenosis. Comprehensive models typically employ three-dimensional (3D) computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to simulate coronary blood flow in order to compute transstenotic pressure drop at the arterial stenosis. In this study, we evaluate the capability of different hydrodynamic models to compute transstenotic pressure drop. Models range from algebraic formulae to one-dimensional (1D), two-dimensional (2D), and 3D time-dependent CFD simulations. Although several algebraic pressure-drop formulae have been proposed in the literature, these models were found to exhibit wide variation in predictions. Nonetheless, we demonstrate an algebraic formula that provides consistent predictions with 3D CFD results for various changes in stenosis severity, morphology, location, and flow rate. The accounting of viscous dissipation and flow separation were found to be significant contributions to accurate reduce order modeling of transstenotic coronary hemodynamics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Mirramezani et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: