Dataset Information

On the impact of modelling assumptions in multi-scale, subject-specific models of aortic haemodynamics.

ABSTRACT: Simulation of haemodynamics has become increasingly popular within the research community. Irrespective of the modelling approach (zero-dimensional (0D), one-dimensional (1D) or three-dimensional (3D)), in vivo measurements are required to personalize the arterial geometry, material properties and boundary conditions of the computational model. Limitations in in vivo data acquisition often result in insufficient information to determine all model parameters and, hence, arbitrary modelling assumptions. Our goal was to minimize and understand the impact of modelling assumptions on the simulated blood pressure, flow and luminal area waveforms by studying a small region of the systemic vasculature-the upper aorta-and acquiring a rich array of non-invasive magnetic resonance imaging and tonometry data from a young healthy volunteer. We first investigated the effect of different modelling assumptions for boundary conditions and material parameters in a 1D/0D simulation framework. Strategies were implemented to mitigate the impact of inconsistencies in the in vivo data. Average relative errors smaller than 7% were achieved between simulated and in vivo waveforms. Similar results were obtained in a 3D/0D simulation framework using the same inflow and outflow boundary conditions and consistent geometrical and mechanical properties. We demonstrated that accurate subject-specific 1D/0D and 3D/0D models of aortic haemodynamics can be obtained using non-invasive clinical data while minimizing the number of arbitrary modelling decisions.

SUBMITTER: Alastruey J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4938079 | biostudies-other | 2016 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

On the impact of modelling assumptions in multi-scale, subject-specific models of aortic haemodynamics.

Alastruey Jordi J Xiao Nan N Fok Henry H Schaeffter Tobias T Figueroa C Alberto CA

Journal of the Royal Society, Interface 20160601 119

Simulation of haemodynamics has become increasingly popular within the research community. Irrespective of the modelling approach (zero-dimensional (0D), one-dimensional (1D) or three-dimensional (3D)), in vivo measurements are required to personalize the arterial geometry, material properties and boundary conditions of the computational model. Limitations in in vivo data acquisition often result in insufficient information to determine all model parameters and, hence, arbitrary modelling assump ...[more]

PMID: 27307511

Similar Datasets

Project description:The majority of musculoskeletal modelling studies investigating healthy populations use generic models linearly scaled to roughly match an individual's anthropometry. Generic models disregard the considerable variation in musculoskeletal geometry and tissue properties between individuals. This study investigated the physiological implications of personalizing musculoskeletal model geometry (body segment mass, inertia, joint center, and maximum isometric muscle force). Nine healthy athletes performed ten repetitions of 15 meter sprints at 75-95% of their maximum sprinting speed and ten repetitions of unanticipated sidestep cut trials with a 4.5-5.5 m/s approach running speed. Structural magnetic resonance imaging was collected on the lower extremities, from which subject-specific musculoskeletal models were developed. A one-dimensional statistical parametric mapping paired t-test was used to compare generic and subject-specific musculoskeletal models for: lower-limb kinematics, kinetics, torque matching, as well as hamstrings, adductors, and quadriceps muscle activations and fiber dynamics. Percentage change of geometric parameters between generic and subject-specific models were determined. Compared to generic models, subject-specific models showed significantly lower ankle dorsi/plantar flexion angle during sprinting and several significantly different net joint moments during sprint and cut tasks. Additionally, subject-specific models demonstrated better torque matching, more physiologically plausible fiber lengths, higher fiber velocities, lower muscle forces, and lower simulated activations in a subset of investigated muscles and motor tasks. Furthermore, subject-specific models identified between-limb differences that were not identified with generic models. Use of subject-specific modeling, even in healthy populations, may result in more physiologically plausible muscle fiber mechanics. Implementing subject-specific models may be especially beneficial when investigating populations with substantial geometric between-limb differences, or unilateral musculoskeletal pathologies, as these are not captured by a generic model.

Project description:Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) is increasingly used to characterize functional connectivity between brain regions. Given the vast number of between-voxel interactions in high-dimensional fMRI data, it is an ongoing challenge to detect stable and generalizable functional connectivity in the brain among groups of subjects. Component models can be used to define subspace representations of functional connectivity that are more interpretable. It is, however, unclear which component model provides the optimal representation of functional networks for multi-subject fMRI datasets. A flexible cross-validation approach that assesses the ability of the models to predict voxel-wise covariance in new data, using three different measures of generalization was proposed. This framework is used to compare a range of component models with varying degrees of flexibility in their representation of functional connectivity, evaluated on both simulated and experimental resting-state fMRI data. It was demonstrated that highly flexible subject-specific component subspaces, as well as very constrained average models, are poor predictors of whole-brain functional connectivity, whereas the best-generalizing models account for subject variability within a common spatial subspace. Within this set of models, spatial Independent Component Analysis (sICA) on concatenated data provides more interpretable brain patterns, whereas a consistent-covariance model that accounts for subject-specific network scaling (PARAFAC2) provides greater stability in functional connectivity relationships between components and their spatial representations. The proposed evaluation framework is a promising quantitative approach to evaluating component models, and reveals important differences between subspace models in terms of predictability, robustness, characterization of subject variability, and interpretability of the model parameters. Hum Brain Mapp 38:882-899, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Dataset Information

On the impact of modelling assumptions in multi-scale, subject-specific models of aortic haemodynamics.

Publications

On the impact of modelling assumptions in multi-scale, subject-specific models of aortic haemodynamics.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets