Login
Register
Reset Password
Publish & Distribute
Publishing Solutions
Distribution Solutions
Subjects
Architecture and Design
Arts
Business and Economics
Chemistry
Classical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies
Computer Sciences
Cultural Studies
Engineering
General Interest
Geosciences
History
Industrial Chemistry
Jewish Studies
Law
Library and Information Science, Book Studies
Life Sciences
Linguistics and Semiotics
Literary Studies
Materials Sciences
Mathematics
Medicine
Music
Pharmacy
Philosophy
Physics
Social Sciences
Sports and Recreation
Theology and Religion
Publications
Journals
Books
Proceedings
Publishers
Blog
Contact
Search
EUR
USD
GBP
English
English
Deutsch
Polski
Español
Français
Italiano
Cart
Home
Journals
Journal of Electrical Bioimpedance
Volume 11 (2020): Issue 1 (January 2020)
Open Access
Electrode positioning to investigate the changes of the thoracic bioimpedance caused by aortic dissection – a simulation study
V. Badeli
V. Badeli
,
G. M. Melito
G. M. Melito
,
A. Reinbacher-Köstinger
A. Reinbacher-Köstinger
,
O. Bíró
O. Bíró
and
K. Ellermann
K. Ellermann
| Jun 25, 2020
Journal of Electrical Bioimpedance
Volume 11 (2020): Issue 1 (January 2020)
About this article
Previous Article
Next Article
Abstract
Article
Figures & Tables
References
Authors
Articles in this Issue
Preview
PDF
Cite
Share
Published Online:
Jun 25, 2020
Page range:
38 - 48
Received:
Mar 16, 2020
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2478/joeb-2020-0007
Keywords
Aortic dissection
,
impedance cardiography
,
numerical simulation
,
sensitivity analysis
© 2020 V. Badeli et al., published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Fig. 1
a) Intimal tear in the aorta [2]. b) Aortic dissection types (Stanford system) [3].
Fig. 2
The spatial average time-dependent cross-sectional radius of the aortic arch and the descending aorta during one cardiac cycle.
Fig. 3
The spatial average time-dependent blood velocity in the aortic arch and the descending aorta.
Fig. 4
Orientation and deformation of RBCs in a blood vessel during the systole and diastole.
Fig. 5
The blood conductivity changes as a function of reduced average velocity 〈v/R〉 for different haematocrit (H) levels.
Fig. 6
Simulation model setup. a) 3D view – b) 2D bottom view.
Fig. 7
Flow disturbances around the dissection in case of an aortic dissection.
Fig. 8
Damage factor DF as a function of the radius of the false lumen.
Fig. 9
Source electrode pairs and measurement electrode pairs positions.
Fig. 10
Values of Y^n,mPCE(t) \widehat Y_{n,m}^{PCE}(t) reflecting the discrepancy between the healthy and dissected conditions for 20-time steps and all proposed electrode combinations.
Fig. 11
Maximal discrepancy Y^maxPCE \widehat Y_{max}^{PCE} for the fourth time step and each electrode configuration. Colours show source electrodes; blue: injection from A, red: injection from B, yellow: injection from C; numbers show the measurement electrodes.
Fig. 12
Sensitivity analysis on a. HC^C,4PCE(t) \widehat {HC}_{C,4}^{PCE}(t) , b. DC^C,4PCE(t) \widehat {DC}_{C,4}^{PCE}(t) , c. Y^C,4PCE(t) \widehat Y_{C,4}^{PCE}(t) .
Fig. 13
Changing of Y^maxPCE \widehat Y_{max}^{PCE} by the damage factor for injection from source electrodes C (inj C) and measurement from five electrode pairs (m1 to m5).
Fig. 14
a. HC^C,4PCE(t) \widehat {HC}_{C,4}^{PCE}(t) and DC^C,4PCE(t) \widehat {DC}_{C,4}^{PCE}(t) for different damage factors, b. Y^C,4PCE(t) \widehat Y_{C,4}^{PCE}(t) for different damage factors.
Input space description for the healthy and dissected study cases.
Cases
Variable
Distribution
Moments
Unit
Healthy
R
TL
Uniform
[1.35 1.95]
cm
θ
H
Uniform
[1.0 1.1]
-
Dissected
R
TL
Uniform
[1.35 1.95]
cm
θ
H
Uniform
[1.0 1.1]
-
R
TL
Uniform
[0.3 1.5]
cm
α
FL
Uniform
[2.9 3.65]
rad
Preview