An automated and time-efficient framework for simulation of coronary blood flow under steady and pulsatile conditions

Abstract

Background and objective

Invasive fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement is the gold standard method for coronary artery disease (CAD) diagnosis. FFR-CT exploits computational fluid dynamics (CFD) for non-invasive evaluation of FFR, simulating coronary flow in virtual geometries reconstructed from computed tomography (CT), but suffers from cost-intensive computing process and uncertainties in the definition of patient specific boundary conditions (BCs). In this work, we investigated the use of time-averaged steady BCs, compared to pulsatile to reduce the computational time and deployed a self-adjusting method for the tuning of BCs to patient-specific clinical data.

Methods

133 coronary arteries were reconstructed form CT images of patients suffering from CAD. For each vessel, invasive FFR was measured. After segmentation, the geometries were prepared for CFD simulation by clipping the outlets and discretizing into tetrahedral mesh. Steady BCs were defined in two steps: (i) rest BCs were extrapolated from clinical and image-derived data; (ii) hyperemic BCs were computed from resting conditions. Flow rate was iteratively adjusted during the simulation, until patient's aortic pressure was matched. Pulsatile BCs were defined exploiting the convergence values of steady BCs. After CFD simulation, lesion-specific hemodynamic indexes were computed and compared between group of patients for which surgery was indicated and not. The whole pipeline was implemented as a straightforward process, in which each single step is performed automatically.

Results

Steady and pulsatile FFR-CT yielded a strong correlation (r = 0.988, p < 0.001) and correlated with invasive FFR (r = 0.797, p < 0.001). The per-point difference between the pressure and FFR-CT field predicted by the two methods was below 1 % and 2 %, respectively. Both approaches exhibited a good diagnostic performance: accuracy was 0.860 and 0.864, the AUC was 0.923 and 0.912, for steady and pulsatile case, respectively. The computational time required by steady BCs CFD was approximatively 30-folds lower than pulsatile case.

Conclusions

This work shows the feasibility of using steady BCs CFD for computing the FFR-CT in coronary arteries, as well as its computational and diagnostic performance within a fully automated pipeline.