Ryan Pewowaruk1,2, John Ralphe3, Luke Lamers3, Alejandro Roldán-Alzate4,5. 1. Cardiovascular Research Center, University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, USA. pewowaruk@wisc.edu. 2. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, William S. Middleton Memorial Veteran's Hospital, Office: D222, 2500 Overlook Terrace, Madison, WI, 53705-4108, USA. pewowaruk@wisc.edu. 3. Division of Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics, University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, USA. 4. Mechanical Engineering, University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the ability of hemodynamic simulations to predict the success of catheter interventions in a swine model of branch pulmonary artery stenosis (bPAS). BACKGROUND: bPAS commonly occurs in congenital heart disease and is often managed with catheter based interventions. However, despite technical success, bPAS interventions do not lead to improved distal pulmonary blood flow (PBF) distribution in approximately 1/3rd of patients. New tools are needed to better identify which patients with bPAS would most benefit from catheter interventions. METHODS: For 13 catheter intervention cases in swine with surgically created left PAS (LPAS), PA pressures from right heart catheterization (RHC) and PBF distributions from MRI were measured before and after catheter interventions. Hemodynamic simulations with a reduced order computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model were performed using non-invasive PBF measurements derived from MRI, and then correlated with changes in invasive measures of hemodynamics and PBF distributions before and after catheter intervention to relieve bPAS. RESULTS: Compared to experimentally measured changes in left PBF distribution, simulations had a small bias (3.4 ± 11.1%), moderate agreement (ICC = 0.69 [0.24-0.90], 0.71 [0.23-0.91]), and good diagnostic capability to predict successful interventions (> 20% PBF increase) (AUC 0.83 [0.59-1.0]). Simulations had poorer prediction of changes in stenotic pressure gradient (ICC = 0.28 [- 0.33 to 0.73], r = 0.57 [- 0.04 to 0.87]) and MPA systolic pressure (ICC = 0.00 [- 0.52 to 0.53], r = 0.29 [- 0.32 to 0.72]). CONCLUSION: While there was only weak to moderate agreement between predicted and measured changes in PA pressures and pulmonary blood flow distributions, hemodynamic simulations did show good diagnostic value for predicting successful versus unsuccessful catheter based interventions to relieve bPAS. The results of this proof of concept study are promising and should encourage future development for using hemodynamic models in planning interventions for patients with bPAS.
OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the ability of hemodynamic simulations to predict the success of catheter interventions in a swine model of branch pulmonary artery stenosis (bPAS). BACKGROUND: bPAS commonly occurs in congenital heart disease and is often managed with catheter based interventions. However, despite technical success, bPAS interventions do not lead to improved distal pulmonary blood flow (PBF) distribution in approximately 1/3rd of patients. New tools are needed to better identify which patients with bPAS would most benefit from catheter interventions. METHODS: For 13 catheter intervention cases in swine with surgically created left PAS (LPAS), PA pressures from right heart catheterization (RHC) and PBF distributions from MRI were measured before and after catheter interventions. Hemodynamic simulations with a reduced order computational fluid dynamics (CFD) model were performed using non-invasive PBF measurements derived from MRI, and then correlated with changes in invasive measures of hemodynamics and PBF distributions before and after catheter intervention to relieve bPAS. RESULTS: Compared to experimentally measured changes in left PBF distribution, simulations had a small bias (3.4 ± 11.1%), moderate agreement (ICC = 0.69 [0.24-0.90], 0.71 [0.23-0.91]), and good diagnostic capability to predict successful interventions (> 20% PBF increase) (AUC 0.83 [0.59-1.0]). Simulations had poorer prediction of changes in stenotic pressure gradient (ICC = 0.28 [- 0.33 to 0.73], r = 0.57 [- 0.04 to 0.87]) and MPA systolic pressure (ICC = 0.00 [- 0.52 to 0.53], r = 0.29 [- 0.32 to 0.72]). CONCLUSION: While there was only weak to moderate agreement between predicted and measured changes in PA pressures and pulmonary blood flow distributions, hemodynamic simulations did show good diagnostic value for predicting successful versus unsuccessful catheter based interventions to relieve bPAS. The results of this proof of concept study are promising and should encourage future development for using hemodynamic models in planning interventions for patients with bPAS.
Authors: Ryan Pewowaruk; Joshua Hermsen; Cody Johnson; Alexandra Erdmann; Kevin Pettit; Scott Aesif; J Carter Ralphe; Christopher J Francois; Alejandro Roldán-Alzate; Luke Lamers Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2020-10-16 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Vladimir Rubimbura; Benoit Guillon; Stéphane Fournier; Nicolas Amabile; Chan Chi Pan; Nicolas Combaret; Eric Eeckhout; Marion Kibler; Johanne Silvain; William Wijns; Francois Schiele; Olivier Muller; Nicolas Meneveau; Julien Adjedj Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2019-11-25 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Mark A Law; Pirouz Shamszad; Alan W Nugent; Henri Justino; John P Breinholt; Charles E Mullins; Frank F Ing Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2010-04-01 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Matthew J Lewis; Kevin F Kennedy; Jonathan Ginns; Matthew A Crystal; Alejandro Torres; Julie Vincent; Marlon S Rosenbaum Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2016-03-22 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Christopher J Petit; Matthew J Gillespie; Matthew A Harris; Travis L Seymour; Timothy Y Liu; Azeem Khan; J William Gaynor; Jonathan J Rome Journal: J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg Date: 2009-04-11 Impact factor: 5.209
Authors: Weiguang Yang; Frank L Hanley; Frandics P Chan; Alison L Marsden; Irene E Vignon-Clementel; Jeffrey A Feinstein Journal: Congenit Heart Dis Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 2.007
Authors: Bjarne L Nørgaard; Jonathon Leipsic; Sara Gaur; Sujith Seneviratne; Brian S Ko; Hiroshi Ito; Jesper M Jensen; Laura Mauri; Bernard De Bruyne; Hiram Bezerra; Kazuhiro Osawa; Mohamed Marwan; Christoph Naber; Andrejs Erglis; Seung-Jung Park; Evald H Christiansen; Anne Kaltoft; Jens F Lassen; Hans Erik Bøtker; Stephan Achenbach Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2014-01-30 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Michiel J Bom; Stefan P Schumacher; Roel S Driessen; Pepijn A van Diemen; Henk Everaars; Ruben W de Winter; Peter M van de Ven; Albert C van Rossum; Ralf W Sprengers; Niels J W Verouden; Alexander Nap; Maksymilian P Opolski; Jonathon A Leipsic; Ibrahim Danad; Charles A Taylor; Paul Knaapen Journal: Catheter Cardiovasc Interv Date: 2020-08-26 Impact factor: 2.692