Literature DB >> 26475178

A guide to uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analysis for cardiovascular applications.

Vinzenz Gregor Eck1, Wouter Paulus Donders2, Jacob Sturdy1, Jonathan Feinberg3,4, Tammo Delhaas5, Leif Rune Hellevik1,3, Wouter Huberts5.   

Abstract

As we shift from population-based medicine towards a more precise patient-specific regime guided by predictions of verified and well-established cardiovascular models, an urgent question arises: how sensitive are the model predictions to errors and uncertainties in the model inputs? To make our models suitable for clinical decision-making, precise knowledge of prediction reliability is of paramount importance. Efficient and practical methods for uncertainty quantification (UQ) and sensitivity analysis (SA) are therefore essential. In this work, we explain the concepts of global UQ and global, variance-based SA along with two often-used methods that are applicable to any model without requiring model implementation changes: Monte Carlo (MC) and polynomial chaos (PC). Furthermore, we propose a guide for UQ and SA according to a six-step procedure and demonstrate it for two clinically relevant cardiovascular models: model-based estimation of the fractional flow reserve (FFR) and model-based estimation of the total arterial compliance (CT ). Both MC and PC produce identical results and may be used interchangeably to identify most significant model inputs with respect to uncertainty in model predictions of FFR and CT . However, PC is more cost-efficient as it requires an order of magnitude fewer model evaluations than MC. Additionally, we demonstrate that targeted reduction of uncertainty in the most significant model inputs reduces the uncertainty in the model predictions efficiently. In conclusion, this article offers a practical guide to UQ and SA to help move the clinical application of mathematical models forward.
Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Monte Carlo; arterial compliance; cardiovascular modeling; fractional flow reserve; polynomial chaos; sensitivity analysis; uncertainty quantification

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26475178     DOI: 10.1002/cnm.2755

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng        ISSN: 2040-7939            Impact factor:   2.747


  21 in total

Review 1.  An audit of uncertainty in multi-scale cardiac electrophysiology models.

Authors:  Richard H Clayton; Yasser Aboelkassem; Chris D Cantwell; Cesare Corrado; Tammo Delhaas; Wouter Huberts; Chon Lok Lei; Haibo Ni; Alexander V Panfilov; Caroline Roney; Rodrigo Weber Dos Santos
Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 4.226

2.  Uncertainty Quantification in a Patient-Specific One-Dimensional Arterial Network Model: EnKF-Based Inflow Estimator.

Authors:  Andrea Arnold; Christina Battista; Daniel Bia; Yanina Zócalo German; Ricardo L Armentano; Hien Tran; Mette S Olufsen
Journal:  J Verif Valid Uncertain Quantif       Date:  2017-02-22

3.  Geometric Uncertainty in Patient-Specific Cardiovascular Modeling with Convolutional Dropout Networks.

Authors:  Gabriel D Maher; Casey M Fleeter; Daniele E Schiavazzi; Alison L Marsden
Journal:  Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng       Date:  2021-08-14       Impact factor: 6.588

4.  Towards Estimating the Uncertainty Associated with Three-Dimensional Geometry Reconstructed from Medical Image Data.

Authors:  Marc Horner; Stephen M Luke; Kerim O Genc; Todd M Pietila; Ross T Cotton; Benjamin A Ache; Zachary H Levine; Kevin C Townsend
Journal:  J Verif Valid Uncertain Quantif       Date:  2019

5.  Determining the impacts of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation on cerebral oxygenation using a one-dimensional blood flow simulator.

Authors:  Bradley Feiger; Ajar Kochar; John Gounley; Desiree Bonadonna; Mani Daneshmand; Amanda Randles
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2020-03-03       Impact factor: 2.712

6.  Efficient sampling for polynomial chaos-based uncertainty quantification and sensitivity analysis using weighted approximate Fekete points.

Authors:  Kyle M Burk; Akil Narayan; Joseph A Orr
Journal:  Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng       Date:  2020-09-09       Impact factor: 2.747

7.  Quantification of model and data uncertainty in a network analysis of cardiac myocyte mechanosignalling.

Authors:  Shulin Cao; Yasser Aboelkassem; Ariel Wang; Daniela Valdez-Jasso; Jeffrey J Saucerman; Jeffrey H Omens; Andrew D McCulloch
Journal:  Philos Trans A Math Phys Eng Sci       Date:  2020-05-25       Impact factor: 4.226

Review 8.  Analysis of Uncertainty and Variability in Finite Element Computational Models for Biomedical Engineering: Characterization and Propagation.

Authors:  Nerea Mangado; Gemma Piella; Jérôme Noailly; Jordi Pons-Prats; Miguel Ángel González Ballester
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2016-11-07

9.  Intima heterogeneity in stress assessment of atherosclerotic plaques.

Authors:  Ali C Akyildiz; Lambert Speelman; Bas van Velzen; Raoul R F Stevens; Antonius F W van der Steen; Wouter Huberts; Frank J H Gijsen
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 3.906

10.  The impact of shape uncertainty on aortic-valve pressure-drop computations.

Authors:  M J M M Hoeijmakers; W Huberts; M C M Rutten; F N van de Vosse
Journal:  Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng       Date:  2021-08-23       Impact factor: 2.648

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.