Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 15, 2026

Lumped-Parameter and Finite Element Modeling of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction
Published on: February 13, 2021
Modeling Active Contraction and Relaxation of Left Ventricle Using Different Zero-load Diastole and Systole
Longling Fan1, Jing Yao2, Chun Yang3
1Department of Mathematics, Southeast University, Nanjing, 210096, China.
Abstract:
Modeling ventricle active contraction based on in vivo data is extremely challenging because of complex ventricle geometry, dynamic heart motion and active contraction where the reference geometry (zero-stress geometry) changes constantly. A new modeling approach using different diastole and systole zero-load geometries was introduced to handle the changing zero-load geometries for more accurate stress/strain calculations. Echo image data were acquired from 5 patients with infarction (Infarct Group) and 10 without (Non-Infarcted Group). Echo-based computational two-layer left ventricle models using one zero-load geometry (1G) and two zero-load geometries (2G) were constructed. Material parameter values in Mooney-Rivlin models were adjusted to match echo volume data. Effective Young's moduli (YM) were calculated for easy comparison. For diastole phase, begin-filling (BF) mean YM value in the fiber direction (YMf) was 738% higher than its end-diastole (ED) value (645.39 kPa vs. 76.97 kPa, p=3.38E-06). For systole phase, end-systole (ES) YMf was 903% higher than its begin-ejection (BE) value (1025.10 kPa vs. 102.11 kPa, p=6.10E-05). Comparing systolic and diastolic material properties, ES YMf was 59% higher than its BF value (1025.10 kPa vs. 645.39 kPa. p=0.0002). BE mean stress value was 514% higher than its ED value (299.69 kPa vs. 48.81 kPa, p=3.39E-06), while BE mean strain value was 31.5% higher than its ED value (0.9417 vs. 0.7162, p=0.004). Similarly, ES mean stress value was 562% higher than its BF value (19.74 kPa vs. 2.98 kPa, p=6.22E-05), and ES mean strain value was 264% higher than its BF value (0.1985 vs. 0.0546, p=3.42E-06). 2G models improved over 1G model limitations and may provide better material parameter estimation and stress/strain calculations.
Related Concept Videos
Stress-Strain Diagram - Ductile Materials
Stress-Strain Diagram - Brittle Materials
Distributions to Estimate Population Parameter
Problem Solving on Stress and Strain
Stress-Strain Diagram
Stress: General Loading Conditions
The shearing force, possessing potential directionality within the plane of the section, is simplified into two component forces running parallel to the x and y axes....

