Johnsen, S.G. Computational Rhinology: Unraveling Discrepancies between In Silico and In Vivo Nasal Airflow Assessments for Enhanced Clinical Decision Support. Bioengineering2024, 11, 239.
Johnsen, S.G. Computational Rhinology: Unraveling Discrepancies between In Silico and In Vivo Nasal Airflow Assessments for Enhanced Clinical Decision Support. Bioengineering 2024, 11, 239.
Johnsen, S.G. Computational Rhinology: Unraveling Discrepancies between In Silico and In Vivo Nasal Airflow Assessments for Enhanced Clinical Decision Support. Bioengineering2024, 11, 239.
Johnsen, S.G. Computational Rhinology: Unraveling Discrepancies between In Silico and In Vivo Nasal Airflow Assessments for Enhanced Clinical Decision Support. Bioengineering 2024, 11, 239.
Abstract
Computational rhinology is a specialized branch of biomechanics leveraging engineering techniques for mathematical modelling and simulation to complement the medical field of rhinology. Computational rhinology has already contributed significantly to advancing our understanding of the nasal function, including airflow patterns, mucosal cooling, particle deposition, and drug delivery, and is foreseen as a crucial element in e.g. the development of virtual surgery as a clinical, patient-specific decision support tool.
The current paper delves into the field of computational rhinology from a nasal airflow perspective, highlighting the use of computational fluid dynamics to enhance diagnostics and treatment of breathing disorders. The paper consists of three distinct parts – an introduction to and review of the field of computational rhinology, a review of published literature on in vitro and in silico studies of nasal airflow, and the presentation and analysis of previously unpublished high fidelity CFD simulation data of in silico rhinomanometry.
While the two first parts of the paper summarize the current status and challenges in the application of computational tools in rhinology, the last part addresses the gross disagreement commonly observed when comparing in silico and in vivo rhinomanometry results. It is concluded that this discrepancy cannot readily be explained by CFD model deficiencies caused by poor choice of turbulence model, insufficient spatial or temporal resolution, or neglecting transient effects. Hence, alternative explanations such as nasal cavity compliance or drag effects due to nasal hair should be investigated.
Medicine and Pharmacology, Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine
Copyright:
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
