A head-to-head comparison between CT- and IVUS-derived coronary blood flow models

• Published in: Journal of biomechanics 2017-01, Vol.51, p.65-76
• Main Authors: Bulant, C.A, Blanco, P.J, Maso Talou, G.D, Bezerra, C. Guedes, Lemos, P.A, Feijóo, R.A
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Aged; Angiography; Bias; Blood flow; Blood vessels; Boundary conditions; Computed tomography; Coronary Angiography; Coronary blood flow; Coronary Circulation; Coronary vessels; Coronary Vessels - physiology; Female; Fractional flow reserve; Fractional Flow Reserve, Myocardial; Heart - physiology; Heart rate; Hemodynamics; Humans; Intravascular ultrasound; Male; Mathematical models; Medical imaging; Middle Aged; Models, Cardiovascular; Patients; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation; Predictions; Reserves; Simulation; Standard deviation; Statistical analysis; Studies; Tomography, X-Ray Computed; Ultrasonography; Veins & arteries; Wall shear stress
• ISSN: 0021-9290; 1873-2380
• DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.11.070

Abstract The goal of this work is to compare coronary hemodynamics as predicted by computational blood flow models derived from two imaging modalities: coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) and intravascular ultrasound integrated with angiography (IVUS). Criteria to define boundary conditions are proposed to overcome the dissimilar anatomical definition delivered by both modalities. The strategy to define boundary conditions is novel in the present context, and naturally accounts for the flow redistribution induced by the resistance of coronary vessels. Hyperemic conditions are assumed to assess model predictions under stressed hemodynamic environments similar to those encountered in Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) calculations. As results, it was found that CCTA models predict larger pressure drops, higher average blood velocity and smaller FFR. Concerning the flow rate at distal locations in the major vessels of interest, it was found that CCTA predicted smaller flow than IVUS, which is a consequence of a larger sensitivity of CCTA models to coronary steal phenomena. Comparisons to in-vivo measurements of FFR are shown.