Key result
A newly developed Hybrid Mock Circulatory Loop accurately simulated patient-specific hemodynamics, maintaining a root mean squared error between prescribed and measured pressures below 3 mmHg (2.5%).
Why the study?
The study aimed to develop a Hybrid Mock Circulatory Loop to simulate hemodynamics at a patient-specific level regarding 3D geometry and boundary conditions.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The developed Hybrid Mock Circulatory Loop can accurately reproduce physiological hemodynamics, providing a platform to assess cardiovascular devices, validate numerical simulations, and test imaging systems.
GOAL: This work presents the development of a Hybrid Mock Circulatory Loop (HMCL) to simulate hemodynamics at patient-specific level in terms of both 3D geometry and inlet/outlet boundary conditions. METHODS: Clinical data have been processed to define the morphological and functional patient-specific settings. A piston pump is used to impose a parametric flow rate profile at the inlet of the hemodynamic circuit. In order to guarantee the physiological pressure and flow conditions, a specific hybrid chamber system including a real-time control has been designed and implemented. The developed system was validated firstly in a single outlet branch model and, secondly, on a 3D printed patient-specific multi-branch phantom. Finally, for the 3D phantom, the outlet flow profiles were compared with the corresponding in-vivo flow data. RESULTS: Results showed that the root mean squared error between the prescribed setpoint and the measured pressures was always below 3 mmHg (about 2.5%) for all cases. The obtained flow profiles for the patient-specific model were in agreement with the related functional in-vivo data. SIGNIFICANCE: The capability to reproduce physiological hemodynamics condition, with high-fidelity, plays a significant role in the cardiovascular research. The developed platform can be used to assess the performances of cardiovascular devices, to validate numerical simulations, and to test imaging systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bardi et al. (2022) studied this question. Hybrid Mock Circulatory Loop (HMCL) vs. in-vivo flow data was evaluated on Root mean squared error between prescribed setpoint and measured pressures. A newly developed Hybrid Mock Circulatory Loop accurately simulated patient-specific hemodynamics, maintaining a root mean squared error between prescribed and measured pressures below 3 mmHg (2.5%).
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: