The effect of airway motion and breathing phase during imaging on CFD simulations of respiratory airflow

• Published in: Computers in biology and medicine Vol. 127; p. 104099
• Main Authors: Gunatilaka, Chamindu C., Schuh, Andreas, Higano, Nara S., Woods, Jason C., Bates, Alister J.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States Elsevier Ltd 01.12.2020; Elsevier Limited
• Subjects: Aerodynamics; Air flow; Airway CFD; Airway motion; Allergic diseases; Boundary conditions; Breathing; Computational fluid dynamics; Computer applications; Dynamic models; Expiration; Image acquisition; Image reconstruction; Inspiration; Internal Medicine; Magnetic resonance imaging; Medical imaging; Neonates; Other; Phases; Physiology; Pressure; Pressure loss; Registration; Respiration; Respiratory airflow; Respiratory tract diseases; Simulation; Software; Static models; Trachea; Turbulence models; Unsteady; UTE MRI; United States > US; Respiratory airflow; Airway motion; Unsteady; Trachea; UTE MRI; Airway CFD; Airway Motion; Respiratory Airflow
• ISSN: 0010-4825; 1879-0534; 1879-0534
• DOI: 10.1016/j.compbiomed.2020.104099

Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of respiratory airflow can quantify clinically useful information that cannot be obtained directly, such as the work of breathing (WOB), resistance to airflow, and pressure loss. However, patient-specific CFD simulations are often based on medical imaging that does not capture airway motion and thus may not represent true physiology, directly affecting those measurements. To quantify the variation of respiratory airflow metrics obtained from static models of airway anatomy at several respiratory phases, temporally averaged airway anatomies, and dynamic models that incorporate physiological motion. Neonatal airway images were acquired during free-breathing using 3D high-resolution MRI and reconstructed at several respiratory phases in two healthy subjects and two with airway disease (tracheomalacia). For each subject, five static (end expiration, peak inspiration, end inspiration, peak expiration, averaged) and one dynamic CFD simulations were performed. WOB, airway resistance, and pressure loss across the trachea were obtained for each static simulation and compared with the dynamic simulation results. Large differences were found in the airflow variables between the static simulations at various respiratory phases and the dynamic simulation. Depending on the static airway model used, WOB, resistance, and pressure loss varied up to 237%, 200%, and 94% compared to the dynamic simulation respectively. Changes in tracheal size and shape throughout the breathing cycle directly affect respiratory airflow dynamics and breathing effort. Simulations incorporating realistic airway wall dynamics most closely represent airway physiology; if limited to static simulations, the airway geometry must be obtained during the respiratory phase of interest for a given pathology. •Airway motion needs to be taken into account to perform respiratory airflow CFD simulations.•The impact of the breathing phase during image acquisition on respiratory airflow metrics has been demonstrated.•Work of breathing, airway resistance, and pressure loss depend on the phase of breathing regardless of the subject’s health.