Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering

Joint Journal of the German Society for Biomedical Engineering in VDE and the Austrian and Swiss Societies for Biomedical Engineering

Editor-in-Chief: Dössel, Olaf

Editorial Board: Augat, Peter / Buzug, Thorsten M. / Haueisen, Jens / Jockenhoevel, Stefan / Knaup-Gregori, Petra / Kraft, Marc / Lenarz, Thomas / Leonhardt, Steffen / Malberg, Hagen / Penzel, Thomas / Plank, Gernot / Radermacher, Klaus M. / Schkommodau, Erik / Stieglitz, Thomas / Urban, Gerald A.


CiteScore 2018: 0.47

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.377

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2364-5504
See all formats and pricing
More options …

Comparison of pressure reconstruction approaches based on measured and simulated velocity fields

Samuel Manthey
  • Corresponding author
  • Department of Simulation and Graphics, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Samuel Voß
  • Department of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Christoph Roloff
  • Department of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Daniel Stucht / Dominique Thévenin
  • Department of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Gábor Janiga
  • Department of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Philipp Berg
  • Department of Fluid Dynamics and Technical Flows, University of Magdeburg, Universitaetsplatz 2, 39106 Magdeburg, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2017-09-07 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2017-0064

Abstract

The pressure drop over a pathological vessel section can be used as an important diagnostic indicator. However, it cannot be measured non-invasively. Multiple approaches for pressure reconstruction based on velocity information are available. Regarding in-vivo data introducing uncertainty these approaches may not be robust and therefore validation is required. Within this study, three independent methods to calculate pressure losses from velocity fields were implemented and compared: A three dimensional and a one dimensional method based on the Pressure Poisson Equation (PPE) as well as an approach based on the work-energy equation for incompressible fluids (WERP). In order to evaluate the different approaches, phantoms from pure Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations and in-vivo PC-MRI measurements were used. The comparison of all three methods reveals a good agreement with respect to the CFD pressure solutions for simple geometries. However, for more complex geometries all approaches lose accuracy. Hence, this study demonstrates the need for a careful selection of an appropriate pressure reconstruction algorithm.

Keywords: Pressure drop; pressure reconstruction; Pressure Poisson Equation (PPE)

About the article

Published Online: 2017-09-07


Citation Information: Current Directions in Biomedical Engineering, Volume 3, Issue 2, Pages 309–312, ISSN (Online) 2364-5504, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/cdbme-2017-0064.

Export Citation

©2017 Samuel Manthey et al., published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 License. BY-NC-ND 4.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in