Determinants of biventricular cardiac function: a mathematical model study on geometry and myofiber orientation

In patient-specific mathematical models of cardiac electromechanics, usually a patient-specific geometry and a generic myofiber orientation field are used as input, upon which myocardial tissue properties are tuned to clinical data. It remains unclear to what extent deviations in myofiber orientatio...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology 2017-04, Vol.16 (2), p.721-729
Hauptverfasser: Pluijmert, Marieke, Delhaas, Tammo, de la Parra, Adrián Flores, Kroon, Wilco, Prinzen, Frits W., Bovendeerd, Peter H. M.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:In patient-specific mathematical models of cardiac electromechanics, usually a patient-specific geometry and a generic myofiber orientation field are used as input, upon which myocardial tissue properties are tuned to clinical data. It remains unclear to what extent deviations in myofiber orientation and geometry between model and patient influence model predictions on cardiac function. Therefore, we evaluated the sensitivity of cardiac function for geometry and myofiber orientation in a biventricular (BiV) finite element model of cardiac mechanics. Starting out from a reference geometry in which myofiber orientation had no transmural component, two new geometries were defined with either a 27 % decrease in LV short- to long-axis ratio, or a 16 % decrease of RV length, but identical LV and RV cavity and wall volumes. These variations in geometry caused differences in both local myofiber and global pump work below 6 %. Variation of fiber orientation was induced through adaptive myofiber reorientation that caused an average change in fiber orientation of ∼ 8 ∘ predominantly through the formation of a component in transmural direction. Reorientation caused a considerable increase in local myofiber work ( ∼ 18 % ) and in global pump work ( ∼ 17 % ) in all three geometries, while differences between geometries were below 5 %. The findings suggest that implementing a realistic myofiber orientation is at least as important as defining a patient-specific geometry. The model for remodeling of myofiber orientation seems a useful approach to estimate myofiber orientation in the absence of accurate patient-specific information.
ISSN:1617-7959
1617-7940
DOI:10.1007/s10237-016-0825-y