Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Standard

Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging. / Nguyen, Tin Quoc; Traberg, Marie Sand; Olesen, Jacob Bjerring; Moshavegh, Ramin; Møller-Sørensen, Peter Hasse; Lönn, Lars; Jensen, Jørgen Arendt; Nielsen, Michael Bachmann; Hansen, Kristoffer Lindskov.

I: Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, Bind 48, Nr. 2, 2022, s. 346-357.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift › Tidsskriftartikel › Forskning › fagfællebedømt

Harvard

Nguyen, TQ, Traberg, MS, Olesen, JB, Moshavegh, R, Møller-Sørensen, PH, Lönn, L, Jensen, JA, Nielsen, MB & Hansen, KL 2022, 'Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging', Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, bind 48, nr. 2, s. 346-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.10.004

APA

Nguyen, T. Q., Traberg, M. S., Olesen, J. B., Moshavegh, R., Møller-Sørensen, P. H., Lönn, L., Jensen, J. A., Nielsen, M. B., & Hansen, K. L. (2022). Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, 48(2), 346-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.10.004

Vancouver

Nguyen TQ, Traberg MS, Olesen JB, Moshavegh R, Møller-Sørensen PH, Lönn L o.a. Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. 2022;48(2):346-357. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.10.004

Author

Nguyen, Tin Quoc ; Traberg, Marie Sand ; Olesen, Jacob Bjerring ; Moshavegh, Ramin ; Møller-Sørensen, Peter Hasse ; Lönn, Lars ; Jensen, Jørgen Arendt ; Nielsen, Michael Bachmann ; Hansen, Kristoffer Lindskov. / Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging. I: Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. 2022 ; Bind 48, Nr. 2. s. 346-357.

Bibtex

@article{da81012e199240d396b24ba512f85497,
title = "Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging",
abstract = "Local pressure differences estimated using vector flow imaging (VFI) and direct catheterization in seven carotid bifurcation phantoms were compared with simulated pressure fields. VFI correlated strongly with simulated peak pressure differences (r = 0.99, p < 0.00001), with an average overestimation of 12.3 Pa (28.6%). The range between the lowest and highest pressure difference of VFI underestimated simulations by 4.6 Pa (8.06%; r = 0.99, p < 0.0001). The catheter method exhibited no correlation (r = –0.09, p = 0.85). Ten repeated measurements on one phantom revealed a small standard deviation (SD) for VFI (SD = 8.4%, mean estimated SD = 11.5%), but not for the catheter method (SD = 785.6%). An in vivo peak systolic pressure difference of 97.9 Pa (estimated SD = 30%) was measured using VFI in one healthy individual. This study indicates that VFI pressure difference estimation is feasible in phantoms and in vivo and realistic estimates of the SD can be attained from the data.",
keywords = "Carotid bifurcation, Computational fluid dynamics, Fluid-filled pressure catheter, Fluid–structure interaction, Pressure difference estimation, Ultrasound, Vector flow imaging",
author = "Nguyen, {Tin Quoc} and Traberg, {Marie Sand} and Olesen, {Jacob Bjerring} and Ramin Moshavegh and M{\o}ller-S{\o}rensen, {Peter Hasse} and Lars L{\"o}nn and Jensen, {J{\o}rgen Arendt} and Nielsen, {Michael Bachmann} and Hansen, {Kristoffer Lindskov}",
note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology",
year = "2022",
doi = "10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.10.004",
language = "English",
volume = "48",
pages = "346--357",
journal = "Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology",
issn = "0301-5629",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pressure Difference Estimation in Non-stenotic Carotid Bifurcation Phantoms Using Vector Flow Imaging

AU - Nguyen, Tin Quoc

AU - Traberg, Marie Sand

AU - Olesen, Jacob Bjerring

AU - Moshavegh, Ramin

AU - Møller-Sørensen, Peter Hasse

AU - Lönn, Lars

AU - Jensen, Jørgen Arendt

AU - Nielsen, Michael Bachmann

AU - Hansen, Kristoffer Lindskov

N1 - Publisher Copyright: © 2021 World Federation for Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology

PY - 2022

Y1 - 2022

N2 - Local pressure differences estimated using vector flow imaging (VFI) and direct catheterization in seven carotid bifurcation phantoms were compared with simulated pressure fields. VFI correlated strongly with simulated peak pressure differences (r = 0.99, p < 0.00001), with an average overestimation of 12.3 Pa (28.6%). The range between the lowest and highest pressure difference of VFI underestimated simulations by 4.6 Pa (8.06%; r = 0.99, p < 0.0001). The catheter method exhibited no correlation (r = –0.09, p = 0.85). Ten repeated measurements on one phantom revealed a small standard deviation (SD) for VFI (SD = 8.4%, mean estimated SD = 11.5%), but not for the catheter method (SD = 785.6%). An in vivo peak systolic pressure difference of 97.9 Pa (estimated SD = 30%) was measured using VFI in one healthy individual. This study indicates that VFI pressure difference estimation is feasible in phantoms and in vivo and realistic estimates of the SD can be attained from the data.

AB - Local pressure differences estimated using vector flow imaging (VFI) and direct catheterization in seven carotid bifurcation phantoms were compared with simulated pressure fields. VFI correlated strongly with simulated peak pressure differences (r = 0.99, p < 0.00001), with an average overestimation of 12.3 Pa (28.6%). The range between the lowest and highest pressure difference of VFI underestimated simulations by 4.6 Pa (8.06%; r = 0.99, p < 0.0001). The catheter method exhibited no correlation (r = –0.09, p = 0.85). Ten repeated measurements on one phantom revealed a small standard deviation (SD) for VFI (SD = 8.4%, mean estimated SD = 11.5%), but not for the catheter method (SD = 785.6%). An in vivo peak systolic pressure difference of 97.9 Pa (estimated SD = 30%) was measured using VFI in one healthy individual. This study indicates that VFI pressure difference estimation is feasible in phantoms and in vivo and realistic estimates of the SD can be attained from the data.

KW - Carotid bifurcation

KW - Computational fluid dynamics

KW - Fluid-filled pressure catheter

KW - Fluid–structure interaction

KW - Pressure difference estimation

KW - Ultrasound

KW - Vector flow imaging

U2 - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.10.004

DO - 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2021.10.004

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 34763906

AN - SCOPUS:85118872332

VL - 48

SP - 346

EP - 357

JO - Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology

JF - Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology

SN - 0301-5629

IS - 2

ER -

ID: 288206538