Zienkiewicz Centre for Computational Engineering, College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Data Science Building, Swansea University Medical School, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.
Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng. 2019 Oct;35(10):e3235. doi: 10.1002/cnm.3235. Epub 2019 Aug 16.
Non-invasive coronary computed tomography (CT) angiography-derived fractional flow reserve (cFFR) is an emergent approach to determine the functional relevance of obstructive coronary lesions. Its feasibility and diagnostic performance has been reported in several studies. It is unclear if differences in sensitivity and specificity between these studies are due to study design, population, or "computational methodology." We evaluate the diagnostic performance of four different computational workflows for the prediction of cFFR using a limited data set of 10 patients, three based on reduced-order modelling and one based on a 3D rigid-wall model. The results for three of these methodologies yield similar accuracy of 6.5% to 10.5% mean absolute difference between computed and measured FFR. The main aspects of modelling which affected cFFR estimation were choice of inlet and outlet boundary conditions and estimation of flow distribution in the coronary network. One of the reduced-order models showed the lowest overall deviation from the clinical FFR measurements, indicating that reduced-order models are capable of a similar level of accuracy to a 3D model. In addition, this reduced-order model did not include a lumped pressure-drop model for a stenosis, which implies that the additional effort of isolating a stenosis and inserting a pressure-drop element in the spatial mesh may not be required for FFR estimation. The present benchmark study is the first of this kind, in which we attempt to homogenize the data required to compute FFR using mathematical models. The clinical data utilised in the cFFR workflows are made publicly available online.
非侵入性冠状动脉计算机断层(CT)血管造影衍生的血流储备分数(cFFR)是一种确定阻塞性冠状动脉病变功能相关性的新兴方法。多项研究已报道其可行性和诊断性能。目前尚不清楚这些研究之间的敏感性和特异性差异是由于研究设计、人群还是“计算方法”所致。我们使用 10 名患者的有限数据集评估了四种不同计算工作流程预测 cFFR 的诊断性能,其中三种基于降阶建模,一种基于 3D 刚性壁模型。这三种方法中的三种方法的结果产生了相似的准确性,计算和测量的 FFR 之间的平均绝对差异为 6.5%至 10.5%。影响 cFFR 估计的建模主要方面是入口和出口边界条件的选择以及冠状动脉网络中流量分布的估计。其中一种降阶模型显示出与临床 FFR 测量值最低的总体偏差,表明降阶模型能够达到与 3D 模型相似的准确性水平。此外,该降阶模型没有为狭窄部位包含集中压降模型,这意味着为了进行 FFR 估计,可能不需要对狭窄部位进行隔离并在空间网格中插入压降元件。本基准研究是此类研究中的首例,我们试图使用数学模型来均匀化计算 FFR 所需的数据。cFFR 工作流程中使用的临床数据在线公开提供。