| Literature DB >> 31822264 |
Ruy Freitas Reis1, Juliano Lara Fernandes2, Thaiz Ruberti Schmal3, Bernardo Martins Rocha4,5, Rodrigo Weber Dos Santos4,5, Marcelo Lobosco4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Myocarditis is defined as the inflammation of the myocardium, i.e. the cardiac muscle. Among the reasons that lead to this disease, we may include infections caused by a virus, bacteria, protozoa, fungus, and others. One of the signs of the inflammation is the formation of edema, which may be a consequence of the interaction between interstitial fluid dynamics and immune response. This complex physiological process was mathematically modeled using a nonlinear system of partial differential equations (PDE) based on porous media approach. By combing a model based on Biot's poroelasticity theory with a model for the immune response we developed a new hydro-mechanical model for inflammatory edema. To verify this new computational model, T2 parametric mapping obtained by Magnetic Resonance (MR) imaging was used to identify the region of edema in a patient diagnosed with unspecific myocarditis.Entities:
Keywords: Biomechanics; Computational immunology; Mathematical modeling; Myocarditis; Poroelasticity
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31822264 PMCID: PMC6905016 DOI: 10.1186/s12859-019-3139-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Bioinformatics ISSN: 1471-2105 Impact factor: 3.169
Fig. 1a LGE 4-chamber images showing the presence of an area of enhancement in the mid-wall portion of the lateral wall of the left ventricle (arrowheads). Heterogeneous, focal areas of LGE can also be identified in the septal wall. The localization of these areas of LGE are typical for patients with myocarditis and represent one of the main criteria for its diagnostic by MRI. b T2 parametric maps of the same patient in A, at the same 4-chamber slice position. The region-of-interest 1 in the lateral wall shows a T2 value of 44.8ms versus a T2 in the septum (ROI 2) of 34.5ms. The increased T2 identified in the lateral wall colocalizes with the LGE area seen in A and suggests the presence of edema/inflammation in comparison to an apparently normal area in the septum
Fig. 2Simulation results of the edema formation using Eqs. (1), (4), (19) and (20) considering the model parameters presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3 with initial and boundary conditions defined in Table 4 after 5h of simulation. Panels A and B show the interactions between a pathogen infection and leukocytes considering an initial infection on edematous epicardium, while panels C and D show its consequences to interstitial fluid pressure and the displacement field
Fig. 3Simulation results of the edema formation using Eqs. (1), (4), (19) and (20) considering the model parameters presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3 with initial and boundary conditions defined in Table 4 after 10h of simulation. Panels a and b show the interactions between a pathogen infection and leukocytes considering an initial infection on edematous epicardium, while panels c and d show its consequences to interstitial fluid pressure and the displacement field
Parameters values for Eq. (1) based on [43, 44, 49, 63]
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| Porosity ( | 0.2 |
| Pathogen diffusion coefficient ( | |
| Pathogen reproduction rate ( | |
| Phagocytosis rate ( |
Parameter values for Eq. (4) based on [43, 44, 49, 63]
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| Porosity ( | 0.2 |
| Leukocyte diffusion coefficient ( | |
| Chemotaxis rate( | |
| Induced apoptose rate( | |
| Leukocyte capilar permeability ( | |
| Leukocyte concentration | |
| in the blood ( | 0.55×107 |
| Apoptose rate ( |
Parameter values for Eqs. (20) and (19) based on [43, 44, 49, 63]
| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| Capillary Pressure ( | 20.0 |
| Hydraulic permeability ( | 3.6x |
| Osmotic reflection coefficient ( | 0.91 |
| Capillary oncotic pressure ( | 20.0 |
| Interstitial oncotic pressure ( | 10.0 |
| Pathogen influence in hydraulic permeability ( | |
| Normal lymph flow ( | |
| Lymph flow threshold ( | 20.0 |
| Increase flow velocity ( | 6.5 |
| Initial pressure ( | 0.0 |
| Exponent ( | 5.0 |
| Lamé’s first parameter ( | 27.293 |
| Shear modulus ( | 3.103 |
Initial and boundary condition
| Variable | Initial condition |
| Variable | Boundary condition |
| ( | |
Fig. 4Comparison between the patient edema, identified by a medical doctor, and the results of the numerical simulation. Panel a show the T2 mapping imaging exam, Fig. 1b, segmented into a binary image. Panel b show the fluid phase distribution after 10 h of simulation and a contour line around the simulated edema
Influence of distinct c values on the edema area
| Edematous Tissue Area | |
|---|---|
| 40 | 1.646 |
| 50 | 1.709 |
| 60 | 1.729 |
| 70 | 1.815 |
| 80 | 1.913 |
Fig. 5a Finite element mesh generated based on Fig. 1b. This mesh represents a slice of the long axis of the left ventricle of the heart of the patient. b Distribution of triangular finite elements representing the lymph vessels (white) in the domain. The lymph vessels were uniformly and randomly placed over the domain corresponding to a total of 2.9% of the elements