Abstract
BackgroundThe evaluation, verification and comparison of different numerical heart models are difficult without a commonly available database that could be utilized as a reference. Our aim was to compile an exemplary dataset.MethodsThe following methods were employed: Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of heart and torso, Body Surface Potential Maps (BSPM) and MagnetoCardioGraphy (MCG) maps. The latter were recorded simultaneously from the same individuals a few hours after the MRI sessions.ResultsA training dataset is made publicly available; datasets for blind testing will remain undisclosed.ConclusionsWhile the MRI data may provide a common input that can be applied to different numerical heart models, the verification and comparison of different models can be performed by comparing the measured biosignals with forward calculated signals from the models.
Highlights
The evaluation, verification and comparison of different numerical heart models are difficult without a commonly available database that could be utilized as a reference
While the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) data may provide a common input that can be applied to different numerical heart models, the verification and comparison of different models can be performed by comparing the measured biosignals with forward calculated signals from the models
In order to be able to compare different models, it is a prerequisite to apply them at least to the same heart morphologies. It was a major step forward when the so-called “San Diego rabbit heart” and “San Diego canine heart” of the Cardiac Mechanics Research Group of the UCSD [1] achieved the status of a kind of reference
Summary
The evaluation, verification and comparison of different numerical heart models are difficult without a commonly available database that could be utilized as a reference. Cardiac modeling has been successfully applied in basic research to advance our understanding of fundamental electrophysiological mechanisms in health and disease. While this discipline is rapidly growing, it is becoming more and more difficult to evaluate the quality of the models generated. In order to be able to compare different models, it is a prerequisite to apply them at least to the same heart morphologies It was a major step forward when the so-called “San Diego rabbit heart” and “San Diego canine heart” of the Cardiac Mechanics Research Group of the UCSD [1] achieved the status of a kind of reference. The data of fiber orientations were of significant value and boosted the quality of modeling, because the anisotropy could be considered in a realistic manner
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
