University of Groningen
Hemodynamic analysis based on biofluid models and MRI velocity measurements
Nolte, David
DOI:
10.33612/diss.95571036
IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite from it. Please check the document version below.
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Publication date: 2019
Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database
Citation for published version (APA):
Nolte, D. (2019). Hemodynamic analysis based on biofluid models and MRI velocity measurements. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen. https://doi.org/10.33612/diss.95571036
Copyright
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).
Take-down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons the number of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.
Propositions
accompanying the thesisHemodynamic analysis based on biofluid models and MRI velocity
measurements
by David Julian Nolte
1. The STE method for relative pressure estimation from PC-MRI has the advan-tage over the classical PPE method of less restrictive regularity requirements: the pressure is represented in its natural space (for the incompressible Navier– Stokes equations).
2. The accuracy of STE and PPE depends strongly on the MRI resolution, seg-mentation and CoA severity.
3. For MRI-based pressure drop estimation, data assimilation in comparison with direct methods can reduce scan times at the cost of computational and mod-elling complexity, i.e., transfer work from doctors and patients to engineers (and computers).
4. In MRI-based inverse hemodynamics, inaccurate segmentation deteriorates the precision of the results. By using slip/transpiration boundary conditions with optimized parameters instead of no-slip boundary conditions, such errors can be reduced.
5. Sequential data assimilation methods are efficient for parameter estimation in large flow problems with few parameters.
6. Doctors performing inverse CFD is unrealistic. For such methods to be use-ful in practice, highly efficient collaboration between clinics and engineers is required.
