Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39054524›Full record

ArticleBiomedical engineering online2024

On the feasibility of ultrasound Doppler-based personalized hemodynamic modeling of the abdominal aorta.

Judith Fonken, Milan Gillissen, Eline van Engelen, Marc van Sambeek, Frans van de Vosse, Richard Lopata

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Biomedical engineering online, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Judith FonkenPhotoacoustics & Ultrasound Laboratory Eindhoven (PULS/e), Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loper 3, Eindhoven, 5612AE, The Netherlands. j.h.c.fonken@tue.nl.
Milan GillissenPhotoacoustics & Ultrasound Laboratory Eindhoven (PULS/e), Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loper 3, Eindhoven, 5612AE, The Netherlands.
Eline van EngelenPhotoacoustics & Ultrasound Laboratory Eindhoven (PULS/e), Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loper 3, Eindhoven, 5612AE, The Netherlands.
Marc van SambeekPhotoacoustics & Ultrasound Laboratory Eindhoven (PULS/e), Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loper 3, Eindhoven, 5612AE, The Netherlands.
Frans van de VosseCardiovascular Biomechanics, Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loper 3, Eindhoven, 5612AE, The Netherlands.
Richard LopataPhotoacoustics & Ultrasound Laboratory Eindhoven (PULS/e), Eindhoven University of Technology, Groene Loper 3, Eindhoven, 5612AE, The Netherlands.

Funding

Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 17533
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPersonalized modeling is a promising tool to improve abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) rupture risk assessment. Computed tomography (CT) and quantitative flow (Q-flow) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are widely regarded as the gold standard for acquiring patient-specific geometry and velocity profiles, respectively. However, their frequent utilization is hindered by various drawbacks. Ultrasound is used extensively in current clinical practice and offers a safe, rapid and cost-effective method to acquire patient-specific geometries and velocity profiles. This study aims to extract and validate patient-specific velocity profiles from Doppler ultrasound and to examine the impact of the velocity profiles on computed hemodynamics.

methodsPulsed-wave Doppler (PWD) and color Doppler (CD) data were successfully obtained for six volunteers and seven patients and employed to extract the flow pulse and velocity profile over the cross-section, respectively. The US flow pulses and velocity profiles as well as generic Womersley profiles were compared to the MRI velocities and flows. Additionally, CFD simulations were performed to examine the combined impact of the velocity profile and flow pulse.

resultsLarge discrepancies were found between the US and MRI velocity profiles over the cross-sections, with differences for US in the same range as for the Womersley profile. Differences in flow pulses revealed that US generally performs best in terms of maximum flow, forward flow and ratios between forward and backward flow, whereas it often overestimates the backward flow. Both spatial patterns and magnitude of the computed hemodynamics were considerably affected by the prescribed velocity boundary conditions. Larger errors and smaller differences between the US and generic CFD cases were observed for patients compared to volunteers.

conclusionThese results show that it is feasible to acquire the patient-specific flow pulse from PWD data, provided that the PWD acquisition could be performed proximal to the aneurysm region, and resulted in a triphasic flow pattern. However, obtaining the patient-specific velocity profile over the cross-section using CD data is not reliable. For the volunteers, utilizing the US flow profile instead of the generic flow profile generally resulted in improved performance, whereas this was the case in more than half of the cases for the patients.

Indexed as

Aorta, AbdominalFeasibility StudiesHemodynamicsUltrasonography, DopplerAdultAgedAortic Aneurysm, AbdominalBlood Flow VelocityFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedModels, CardiovascularPatient-Specific ModelingAbdominal aortic aneurysmsComputational fluid dynamicsHemodynamicsPersonalized modelingUltrasound Doppler

Identifiers

PMID39054524
PMCPMC11270776

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.