Accuracy of virtual rhinomanometry

1 Pallanch J. Physiology: Rhinomanometry. In: Nasal Physiology and Pathophysiology of Nasal Disorders. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg; 2013:331-344. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37250-6_25 Search in Google Scholar

2 Homoth Medizin Elektronik. Rhino 4000-M. Published 2021. https://www.homoth.de/en/produkte-undloesungen/details/?id=4&titel=rhino-4000m Search in Google Scholar

3 Várady T, Martin RR, Cox J. Reverse engineering of geometric models—an introduction. Comput Des. 1997;29(4):255-268. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-4485(96)00054-1 Search in Google Scholar

4 Chrzan R, Urbanik A, Karbowski K, Moskała M, Polak J, Pyrich M. Cranioplasty prosthesis manufacturing based on reverse engineering technology. Med Sci Monit. 2012;18(1):1-6. https://doi.org/10.12659/msm.882186356068622207125 Search in Google Scholar

5 Quadrio M, Pipolo C, Corti S, et al. Review of computational fluid dynamics in the assessment of nasal air flow and analysis of its limitations. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2014;271(9):2349-2354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2742-324100883 Search in Google Scholar

6 Faizal WM, Ghazali NNN, Khor CY, et al. Computational fluid dynamics modelling of human upper airway: A review. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2020;196:105627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2020.105627731897632629222 Search in Google Scholar

7 Schillaci A, Quadrio M. Importance of the numerical schemes in the CFD of the human nose. J Biomech. 2022;138:111100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.11110035533422 Search in Google Scholar

8 Corda JV, Shenoy BS, Ahmad KA, et al. Nasal airflow comparison in neonates, infant and adult nasal cavities using computational fluid dynamics. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2022;214:106538. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.10653834848078 Search in Google Scholar

9 Siu J, Inthavong K, Dong J, Shang Y, Douglas RG. Nasal air conditioning following total inferior turbinectomy compared to inferior turbinoplasty – A computational fluid dynamics study. Clin Biomech. 2021;81:105237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2020.10523733272646 Search in Google Scholar

10 Malik J, Otto BA, Zhao K. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Modeling as an Objective Analytical Tool for Nasal/Upper Airway Breathing. Curr Otorhinolaryngol Rep. 2022;10(1):116-120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40136-021-00387-x Search in Google Scholar

11 Sagandykova NS, Fakhradiyev IR, Sajjala SR, et al. Patient-specific CFD simulation of aerodynamics for nasal pathology: a combined computational and experimental study. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Eng Imaging Vis. 2021;9(5):470-479. https://doi.org/10.1080/21681163.2020.1858968 Search in Google Scholar

12 Mataraci F, Karimov U, Ozdemir IB, Yildirim D, Altindag A. CFD simulations and analyses of asymptomatic and symptomatic nasal airway obstructions. J Mech Med Biol. 2022;22(01):9-10. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219519422500051 Search in Google Scholar

13 Aoyagi M, Oshima M, Oishi M, et al. Computational fluid dynamic analysis of the nasal respiratory function before and after postero-superior repositioning of the maxilla. PLoS One. 2022;17(4):1-20. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0267677904954035482658 Search in Google Scholar

14 Huang R, Nedanoski A, Fletcher DF, et al. An automated segmentation framework for nasal computational fluid dynamics analysis in computed tomography. Comput Biol Med. 2019;115:103505. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2019.10350531704374 Search in Google Scholar

15 Leventon ME, Grimson WEL, Faugeras O. Statistical shape influence in geodesic active contours. Biomed Imaging V - Proc 5th IEEE EMBS Int Summer Sch Biomed Imaging, SSBI 2002. 2002;1:316-323. https://doi.org/10.1109/SSBI.2002.1233989 Search in Google Scholar

16 Cootes T, Taylor C, Cooper D, Graham J. Active Shape Models-Their Training and Application. Comput Vis Image Underst. 1995;61(1):38-59. https://doi.org/10.1006/cviu.1995.1004 Search in Google Scholar

17 Keustermans W, Huysmans T, Schmelzer B, Sijbers J, Dirckx JJ. Matlab® toolbox for semi-automatic segmentation of the human nasal cavity based on active shape modeling. Comput Biol Med. 2019;105:27-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.12.00830576918 Search in Google Scholar

18 Cherobin GB, Voegels RL, Gebrim EMMS, Garcia GJM. Sensitivity of nasal airflow variables computed via computational fluid dynamics to the computed tomography segmentation threshold. PLoS One. 2018;13(11). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0207178623929830444909 Search in Google Scholar

19 Quadrio M, Pipolo C, Corti S, et al. Effects of CT resolution and radiodensity threshold on the CFD evaluation of nasal airflow. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2016;54(2-3):411-419. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11517-015-1325-426059996 Search in Google Scholar

20 Inthavong K, Chetty A, Shang Y, Tu J. Examining mesh independence for flow dynamics in the human nasal cavity. Comput Biol Med. 2018;102:40-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.09.01030245276 Search in Google Scholar

21 Schillaci A, Quadrio M. Importance of the numerical schemes in the CFD of the human nose. J Biomech. 2022;138:111100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2022.11110035533422 Search in Google Scholar

22 Kim SK, Na Y, Kim JI, Chung SK. Patient specific CFD models of nasal airflow: Overview of methods and challenges. J Biomech. 2013;46(2):299-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2012.11.02223261244 Search in Google Scholar

23 Tretiakow D, Tesch K, Meyer-Szary J, Markiet K, Skorek A. Three-dimensional modeling and automatic analysis of the human nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses using the computational fluid dynamics method. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2020;1:3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-020-06428-3805797233068172 Search in Google Scholar

24 Tretiakow D, Tesch K, Markiet K, Skorek A. Maxillary sinus aeration analysis using computational fluid dynamics. Sci Rep. 2022;12(1):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14342-3920950135725799 Search in Google Scholar

25 Berger M, Giotakis AI, Pillei M, et al. Agreement between rhinomanometry and computed tomography-based computational fluid dynamics. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2021;16(3):629-638. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-021-02332-1805223733677758 Search in Google Scholar

26 Garcia GJM, Hariri BM, Patel RG, Rhee JS. The relationship between nasal resistance to airflow and the airspace minimal cross-sectional area. J Biomech. 2016;49(9):1670-1678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.03.051488578527083059 Search in Google Scholar

27 Schmidt N, Behrbohm H, Goubergrits L, Hildebrandt T, Brüning J. Comparison of rhinomanometric and computational fluid dynamic assessment of nasal resistance with respect to measurement accuracy. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg. 2022;17:1519-1529. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11548-022-02699-935821562 Search in Google Scholar

28 Kim DW, Chung SK, Na Y. Numerical study on the air conditioning characteristics of the human nasal cavity. Comput Biol Med. 2017;86:18-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2017.04.01828499215 Search in Google Scholar

29 Shamohammadi H, Mehrabi S, Sadrizadeh S, Yaghoubi M, Abouali O. 3D numerical simulation of hot airflow in the human nasal cavity and trachea. Comput Biol Med. 2022;147:105702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2022.10570235772328 Search in Google Scholar

30 Li Q, Wang Z, Wang C, Wang H. Characterizing the respiratory-induced mechanical stimulation at the maxillary sinus fl oor following sinus augmentation by computational fluid dynamics. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2022;10:885130. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.885130936054535957638 Search in Google Scholar

31 Ormiskangas J, Valtonen O, Harju T, Rautiainen M, Kivekäs I. Computational fluid dynamics assessed changes of nasal airflow after inferior turbinate surgery. Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2022;302:103917. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resp.2022.10391735500884 Search in Google Scholar

32 Elcner J, Lizal F, Jedelsky J, Jicha M, Chovancova M. Numerical investigation of inspiratory airflow in a realistic model of the human tracheobronchial airways and a comparison with experimental results. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2016;15(2):447-469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-015-0701-126163996 Search in Google Scholar

33 Croce C, Fodil R, Durand M, et al. In Vitro Experiments and Numerical Simulations of Airflow in Realistic Nasal Airway Geometry. Ann Biomed Eng. 2006;34(6):997-1007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-006-9094-816783655 Search in Google Scholar

34 Xu X, Wu J, Weng W, Fu M. Investigation of inhalation and exhalation flow pattern in a realistic human upper airway model by PIV experiments and CFD simulations. Biomech Model Mechanobiol. 2020;19(5):1679-1695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10237-020-01299-332026145 Search in Google Scholar

35 Van Strien J, Shrestha K, Gabriel S, et al. Pressure distribution and flow dynamics in a nasal airway using a scale resolving simulation. Phys Fluids. 2021;33:011907. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0036095 Search in Google Scholar

36 ANSYS. Ansys Fluent Fluid Simulation Software Ansys Fluent Helps Make Better, Faster Decisions Through. Published 2021. https://www.ansys.com/products/fluids/ansys-fluent Search in Google Scholar

37 Siemens. Simcenter STAR-CCM +. Published 2021. https://www.plm.automation.siemens.com/global/en/products/simcenter/STAR-CCM.html Search in Google Scholar

38 Burgos MA, Sanmiguel-Rojas E, del Pino C, Sevilla-García MA, Esteban-Ortega F. New CFD tools to evaluate nasal airflow. Eur Arch Oto-Rhino-Laryngology. 2017;274(8):3121-3128. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-017-4611-y28547013 Search in Google Scholar

39 Burgos MA, Sevilla García MA, Sanmiguel Rojas E, et al. Virtual surgery for patients with nasal obstruction: Use of computational fluid dynamics (MeComLand®, Digbody® & Noseland®) to document objective flow parameters and optimise surgical results. Acta Otorrinolaringol Esp. 2018;69(3):125-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otorri.2017.05.00528923473 Search in Google Scholar

40 Burgos MA, Sanmiguel-Rojas E, Singh N, Esteban-Ortega F. DigBody®: A new 3D modeling tool for nasal virtual surgery. Comput Biol Med. 2018;98:118-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2018.05.01629787939 Search in Google Scholar

41 slicer.org. 3D Slicer Image Computing Platform. Published online 2022. https://www.slicer.org/ Search in Google Scholar

42 Weiner H. Fused Filament Fabrication – Simply Explained. All3DP. Published 2020. https://all3dp.com/2/fused-filament-fabrication-fff-3d-printing-simply-explained/ Search in Google Scholar

43 Fiberlogy. TDS-EASY-ABS-EN.pdf. Published 2021. https://fiberlogy.com/en/fiberlogy-filaments/easy-abs/ Search in Google Scholar

44 Fiberlogy. TDS-BVOH-EN.pdf. Published 2021. https://fiberlogy.com/en/fiberlogy-filaments/bvoh/ Search in Google Scholar

45 Interacoustics A/S. RhinoStream. Published 2010. http://www.categner.se/PDFblad/RhinoStreamleaflet.pdf Search in Google Scholar

46 Munson BR, Young D, Okiishi T. Fundamentals of Fluid Mechanics. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2018. Search in Google Scholar

47 Karbowski K, Kopiczak B, Chrzan R, Gawlik J, Szaleniec J. Rhinomanometry vs. CFD - results of measurements and calculations. Mendeley Data, V1. Published online 2022. https://doi.org/10.17632/f4hb8dkzrc.1 Search in Google Scholar

• Objective evaluation method using multiple image analyses for panoramic radiography improvement