Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 15, 2026

Optical Coherence Tomography Based Biomechanical Fluid-Structure Interaction Analysis of Coronary Atherosclerosis Progression
Published on: January 15, 2022
Application of an Adaptive Polynomial Chaos Expansion on Computationally Expensive Three-Dimensional Cardiovascular
Sjeng Quicken1, Wouter P Donders2, Emiel M J van Disseldorp3
1Department of Biomedical Engineering, School for Cardiovascular Diseases (CARIM), Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 50, Maastricht 6229 ER, The Netherlands
Abstract:
When applying models to patient-specific situations, the impact of model input uncertainty on the model output uncertainty has to be assessed. Proper uncertainty quantification (UQ) and sensitivity analysis (SA) techniques are indispensable for this purpose. An efficient approach for UQ and SA is the generalized polynomial chaos expansion (gPCE) method, where model response is expanded into a finite series of polynomials that depend on the model input (i.e., a meta-model). However, because of the intrinsic high computational cost of three-dimensional (3D) cardiovascular models, performing the number of model evaluations required for the gPCE is often computationally prohibitively expensive. Recently, Blatman and Sudret (2010, "An Adaptive Algorithm to Build Up Sparse Polynomial Chaos Expansions for Stochastic Finite Element Analysis," Probab. Eng. Mech., 25(2), pp. 183-197) introduced the adaptive sparse gPCE (agPCE) in the field of structural engineering. This approach reduces the computational cost with respect to the gPCE, by only including polynomials that significantly increase the meta-model's quality. In this study, we demonstrate the agPCE by applying it to a 3D abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) wall mechanics model and a 3D model of flow through an arteriovenous fistula (AVF). The agPCE method was indeed able to perform UQ and SA at a significantly lower computational cost than the gPCE, while still retaining accurate results. Cost reductions ranged between 70-80% and 50-90% for the AAA and AVF model, respectively.
More Related Videos
06:18Intravascular Ultrasound Image-Based Finite Element Modeling Approach for Quantifying In Vivo Mechanical Properties of Human Coronary Artery
Published on: December 6, 2024
09:20Lumped-Parameter and Finite Element Modeling of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction
Published on: February 13, 2021
Related Concept Videos
Mechanistic Models: Compartment Models in Algorithms for Numerical Problem Solving
In individual population analyses, different algorithms are employed, such as Cauchy's method, which uses a...
Propagation of Uncertainty from Random Error
Three-Compartment Open Model
Uncertainty: Overview
Model-Independent Approaches for Pharmacokinetic Data: Noncompartmental Analysis
One important characteristic of noncompartmental analyses is that drug exposure increases proportionally with increasing doses. This...
Physiological Pharmacokinetic Models: Blood Flow-Limited Versus Diffusion-Limited Models