↓ Skip to main content

Investigating the Role of Interventricular Interdependence in Development of Right Heart Dysfunction During LVAD Support: A Patient-Specific Methods-Based Approach

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Physiology, May 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (74th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
47 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
69 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Investigating the Role of Interventricular Interdependence in Development of Right Heart Dysfunction During LVAD Support: A Patient-Specific Methods-Based Approach
Published in
Frontiers in Physiology, May 2018
DOI 10.3389/fphys.2018.00520
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kevin L. Sack, Yaghoub Dabiri, Thomas Franz, Scott D. Solomon, Daniel Burkhoff, Julius M. Guccione

Abstract

Predictive computation models offer the potential to uncover the mechanisms of treatments whose actions cannot be easily determined by experimental or imaging techniques. This is particularly relevant for investigating left ventricular mechanical assistance, a therapy for end-stage heart failure, which is increasingly used as more than just a bridge-to-transplant therapy. The high incidence of right ventricular failure following left ventricular assistance reflects an undesired consequence of treatment, which has been hypothesized to be related to the mechanical interdependence between the two ventricles. To investigate the implication of this interdependence specifically in the setting of left ventricular assistance device (LVAD) support, we introduce a patient-specific finite-element model of dilated chronic heart failure. The model geometry and material parameters were calibrated using patient-specific clinical data, producing a mechanical surrogate of the failing in vivo heart that models its dynamic strain and stress throughout the cardiac cycle. The model of the heart was coupled to lumped-parameter circulatory systems to simulate realistic ventricular loading conditions. Finally, the impact of ventricular assistance was investigated by incorporating a pump with pressure-flow characteristics of an LVAD (HeartMate II™ operating between 8 and 12 k RPM) in parallel to the left ventricle. This allowed us to investigate the mechanical impact of acute left ventricular assistance at multiple operating-speeds on right ventricular mechanics and septal wall motion. Our findings show that left ventricular assistance reduces myofiber stress in the left ventricle and, to a lesser extent, right ventricle free wall, while increasing leftward septal-shift with increased operating-speeds. These effects were achieved with secondary, potentially negative effects on the interventricular septum which showed that support from LVADs, introduces unnatural bending of the septum and with it, increased localized stress regions. Left ventricular assistance unloads the left ventricle significantly and shifts the right ventricular pressure-volume-loop toward larger volumes and higher pressures; a consequence of left-to-right ventricular interactions and a leftward septal shift. The methods and results described in the present study are a meaningful advancement of computational efforts to investigate heart-failure therapies in silico and illustrate the potential of computational models to aid understanding of complex mechanical and hemodynamic effects of new therapies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 69 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Student > Master 6 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Other 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 25 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 21 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 8 12%
Unknown 24 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 May 2022.
All research outputs
#6,181,839
of 23,053,613 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Physiology
#2,841
of 13,790 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#106,814
of 325,556 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Physiology
#120
of 483 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,053,613 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 13,790 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 325,556 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 483 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its contemporaries.