pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2602.16000 · v2 · submitted 2026-02-17 · ⚛️ physics.med-ph · cs.LG

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Imaging-Derived Coronary Fractional Flow Reserve: Advances in Physics-Based, Machine Learning, and Physics-Informed Methods

Tanxin Zhu , Emran Hossen , Chen Zhao , Jingfeng Jiang , Michele Esposito , Jiguang Sun , Weihua Zhou
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 21:46 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ physics.med-ph cs.LG
keywords imaging-derived FFRfractional flow reservephysics-informed neural networkscoronary stenosismachine learningcomputational fluid dynamicsclinical translationgeneralizability
0
0 comments X

The pith

Physics-informed neural networks embed fluid conservation laws into coronary FFR models to raise generalizability while keeping rapid inference.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This review traces the move from slow computational fluid dynamics pipelines to machine learning and deep learning for estimating fractional flow reserve directly from CT or angiographic images. Standard data-driven models speed up computation and reduce the need for invasive wires but remain sensitive to differences in scanners, patient groups, and image quality. Physics-informed approaches add the governing equations of blood flow and boundary conditions to the training process, which stabilizes predictions across varied conditions and lowers the volume of labeled examples required. The synthesis concludes that these hybrid frameworks strike a practical balance between speed and physical fidelity, setting the stage for routine, automated functional assessments. The authors identify multi-center prospective validation and standardized quality metrics as the next required steps before wide clinical use.

Core claim

The review establishes that physics-informed neural networks and neural operators improve the robustness of imaging-derived FFR estimates by incorporating conservation structure and boundary-condition consistency into model training, thereby enhancing generalizability, decreasing reliance on dense supervision, and preserving the computational speed needed for clinical deployment.

What carries the argument

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) and physics-informed neural operators (PINOs), which add the partial differential equations of incompressible flow and appropriate boundary conditions to the neural-network loss function during training.

If this is right

  • ML and DL pipelines deliver pressure and FFR predictions from anatomical descriptors or angiographic sequences at speeds far above traditional CFD.
  • Physics-informed training reduces performance drop when models encounter data from new centers or scanners.
  • Models require fewer densely labeled examples because the physical equations supply additional supervision.
  • Deployment-oriented metrics such as calibration, uncertainty estimates, and quality-control gates become central to safe clinical rollout.
  • The field moves toward fully automated, wire-free functional assessment integrated into routine imaging workflows.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Routine integration into CT and cath-lab software could allow immediate functional evaluation of stenoses without separate invasive measurements.
  • The same conservation-embedding strategy may transfer to other vascular territories or cardiac flow problems where labeled data remain scarce.
  • Emphasis on uncertainty quantification could drive the creation of automated rejection criteria that flag unreliable cases before they reach clinicians.

Load-bearing premise

That embedding the standard conservation laws of fluid flow inside the neural loss is enough to capture the hemodynamic behavior of real coronary arteries under the range of vessel shapes, blood properties, and imaging conditions encountered in practice.

What would settle it

A prospective multi-center study in which physics-informed FFR predictions deviate from simultaneously measured invasive wire FFR by more than 0.05 in a substantial fraction of vessels across different acquisition protocols.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.16000 by Chen Zhao, Emran Hossen, Jiguang Sun, Jingfeng Jiang, Michele Esposito, Tanxin Zhu, Weihua Zhou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Workflow-oriented comparison of the major paradigms for imaging-derived FFR estimation, including CFD-based, machine learning–based, and physics-informed approaches. CCTA is used here as an example input. For ICA-based FFR, the downstream estimation framework is largely similar, while the initial stage typically involves ICA-based 3D coronary reconstruction rather than direct CTA-derived geometry. 1.4 Scop… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Purpose of Review Imaging derived fractional flow reserve (FFR) is rapidly evolving beyond conventional computational fluid dynamics (CFD) based pipelines toward machine learning (ML), deep learning (DL), and physics informed approaches that enable fast, wire free, and scalable functional assessment of coronary artery stenosis. This review synthesizes recent advances in computed tomography (CT)- and angiography-based FFR measurement, with particular emphasis on emerging physics-informed neural networks and neural operators (PINNs and PINOs), as well as key considerations for their clinical translation. Recent Findings ML/DL approaches have markedly improved automation and computational speed, enabling prediction of pressure and FFR from anatomical descriptors or angiographic contrast dynamics. However, their real-world performance and generalizability can remain variable and sensitive to domain shift, due to multi-center heterogeneity, interpretability challenges, and differences in acquisition protocols and image quality. Physics informed learning introduces conservation structure and boundary condition consistency into model training, improving generalizability and reducing dependence on dense supervision while maintaining rapid inference. Recent evaluation trends increasingly highlight deployment oriented metrics, including calibration, uncertainty quantification, and quality control gatekeeping, as essential for safe clinical use. Summary The field is converging toward imaging derived FFR methods that are faster, more automated, and more reliable. While ML/DL offers substantial efficiency gains, physics informed frameworks such as PINNs and PINOs may provide a more robust balance between speed and physical consistency. Prospective multi center validation and standardized evaluation will be critical to support broad and safe clinical adoption.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. This review synthesizes advances in imaging-derived coronary fractional flow reserve (FFR) from CT and angiography, tracing the shift from CFD-based pipelines to ML/DL methods and physics-informed neural networks/operators (PINNs/PINOs). It highlights gains in automation, speed, and potential robustness via conservation constraints and boundary consistency, while noting domain-shift challenges and the need for calibration, uncertainty quantification, and multi-center validation for clinical use.

Significance. If the synthesis holds, the manuscript offers a timely map of the field's convergence on faster, more scalable FFR tools. Explicit discussion of how physics-informed constraints may reduce supervision needs and improve generalizability could usefully orient researchers toward hybrid methods that balance inference speed with physical fidelity, provided quantitative backing is added.

major comments (2)
  1. [Recent Findings] Recent Findings: The assertion that physics-informed learning 'improves generalizability and reduc[es] dependence on dense supervision' is presented as a synthesis outcome but rests on narrative extrapolation from individual cited studies without aggregated error statistics, meta-comparison of domain-shift metrics (e.g., external multi-center MAE or calibration slopes), or head-to-head experiments versus standard ML baselines.
  2. [Summary] Summary: The claim that PINNs/PINOs 'may provide a more robust balance between speed and physical consistency' is load-bearing for the review's forward-looking conclusion yet lacks formal assessment of how often the introduced conservation structure actually closes the generalization gap; this weakens support for the stated trajectory toward broad clinical adoption.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Purpose of Review] The manuscript would benefit from an explicit statement of literature search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and date range to allow readers to evaluate completeness and potential selection bias.
  2. Consider adding a summary table of representative performance metrics (MAE, correlation, inference time, domain-shift robustness) across CFD, ML/DL, and physics-informed categories to make the comparative claims more concrete and verifiable.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive review and for recognizing the timeliness of synthesizing advances in imaging-derived FFR. We address the two major comments below and have revised the manuscript to moderate claims and add explicit caveats where the evidence base is narrative rather than quantitative.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Recent Findings] The assertion that physics-informed learning 'improves generalizability and reduc[es] dependence on dense supervision' is presented as a synthesis outcome but rests on narrative extrapolation from individual cited studies without aggregated error statistics, meta-comparison of domain-shift metrics (e.g., external multi-center MAE or calibration slopes), or head-to-head experiments versus standard ML baselines.

    Authors: We agree that the review is a narrative synthesis and does not itself perform a new meta-analysis or head-to-head benchmarking. Individual cited studies report gains in generalizability and reduced supervision requirements when conservation constraints are enforced, but we acknowledge the absence of aggregated statistics across the literature. In the revised manuscript we have added a sentence in the Recent Findings section noting that comprehensive multi-center meta-analyses remain limited and that the observed trends should be interpreted with this caveat. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Summary] The claim that PINNs/PINOs 'may provide a more robust balance between speed and physical consistency' is load-bearing for the review's forward-looking conclusion yet lacks formal assessment of how often the introduced conservation structure actually closes the generalization gap; this weakens support for the stated trajectory toward broad clinical adoption.

    Authors: We accept that the forward-looking statement would benefit from greater qualification. The manuscript is a review and therefore cannot supply a new formal assessment of generalization-gap closure. We have revised the Summary to replace the original phrasing with a more measured statement that physics-informed frameworks show promise for balancing speed and consistency, while emphasizing that prospective multi-center validation is still required before broad clinical adoption can be supported. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: literature review contains no derivations or predictions

full rationale

This manuscript is a narrative literature review synthesizing published advances in CT- and angiography-based FFR estimation. It presents no original equations, fitted parameters, derivation chains, or quantitative predictions that could reduce to self-referential inputs. All statements about physics-informed methods improving generalizability are explicitly attributed to external cited studies rather than derived or fitted within the paper itself. Consequently, none of the enumerated circularity patterns (self-definitional, fitted-input-called-prediction, self-citation load-bearing, etc.) are applicable, and the document is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is a review paper with no original mathematical derivations, data fitting, or postulated entities. No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5597 in / 1187 out tokens · 30870 ms · 2026-05-15T21:46:20.003037+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Pijls NH, van Son JA, Kirkeeide RL, De Bruyne B, Gould KL. Experimental basis of determining maximum coronary, myocardial, and collateral blood flow by pressure measurements for assessing functional stenosis severity before and after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. Circulation. 1993;87(4):1354-67. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.87.4.1354. PubMed PMID...

    work page doi:10.1161/01.cir.87.4.1354 1993

  2. [2]

    Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses

    Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Peels K, Van Der Voort PH, Bonnier HJ, Bartunek JKJJ, et al. Measurement of fractional flow reserve to assess the functional severity of coronary-artery stenoses. N Engl J Med. 1996;334(26):1703-8. doi: 10.1056/nejm199606273342604. PubMed PMID: 8637515

    work page doi:10.1056/nejm199606273342604 1996

  3. [3]

    Clinical outcomes of fractional flow reserve by computed tomographic angiography-guided diagnostic strategies vs

    Douglas PS, Pontone G, Hlatky MA, Patel MR, Norgaard BL, Byrne RA, et al. Clinical outcomes of fractional flow reserve by computed tomographic angiography-guided diagnostic strategies vs. usual care in patients with suspected coronary artery disease: the prospective longitudinal trial of FFR(CT): outcome and resource impacts study. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(47...

    work page doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv444 2015

  4. [4]

    Diagnosis of ischemia- causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms

    Koo BK, Erglis A, Doh JH, Daniels DV, Jegere S, Kim HS, et al. Diagnosis of ischemia- causing coronary stenoses by noninvasive fractional flow reserve computed from coronary computed tomographic angiograms. Results from the prospective multicenter DISCOVER- FLOW (Diagnosis of Ischemia-Causing Stenoses Obtained Via Noninvasive Fractional Flow Reserve) stud...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2011.06.066 2011

  5. [5]

    Deng SB, Jing XD, Wang J, Huang C, Xia S, Du JL, et al. Diagnostic performance of noninvasive fractional flow reserve derived from coronary computed tomography angiography in coronary artery disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Cardiol. 2015;184:703-9. Epub 20150304. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.025. PubMed PMID: 25781722

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.03.025 2015

  6. [6]

    Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography

    Min JK, Leipsic J, Pencina MJ, Berman DS, Koo BK, van Mieghem C, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of fractional flow reserve from anatomic CT angiography. Jama. 2012;308(12):1237-

    work page 2012

  7. [7]

    PubMed PMID: 22922562; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4281479

    doi: 10.1001/2012.jama.11274. PubMed PMID: 22922562; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4281479

    work page doi:10.1001/2012.jama.11274 2012

  8. [8]

    Determinants of Rejection Rate for Coronary CT Angiography Fractional Flow Reserve Analysis

    Pontone G, Weir-McCall JR, Baggiano A, Del Torto A, Fusini L, Guglielmo M, et al. Determinants of Rejection Rate for Coronary CT Angiography Fractional Flow Reserve Analysis. Radiology. 2019;292(3):597-605. Epub 20190723. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2019182673. PubMed PMID: 31335283

    work page doi:10.1148/radiol.2019182673 2019

  9. [9]

    CT Fractional Flow Reserve: A Practical Guide to Application, Interpretation, and Problem Solving

    Rajiah P, Cummings KW, Williamson E, Young PM. CT Fractional Flow Reserve: A Practical Guide to Application, Interpretation, and Problem Solving. Radiographics. 2022;42(2):340-58. Epub 20220204. doi: 10.1148/rg.210097. PubMed PMID: 35119968

    work page doi:10.1148/rg.210097 2022

  10. [10]

    Cardiac CT blooming artifacts: clinical significance, root causes and potential solutions

    Pack JD, Xu M, Wang G, Baskaran L, Min J, De Man B. Cardiac CT blooming artifacts: clinical significance, root causes and potential solutions. Vis Comput Ind Biomed Art. 2022;5(1):29. Epub 20221209. doi: 10.1186/s42492-022-00125-0. PubMed PMID: 36484886; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9733770

    work page doi:10.1186/s42492-022-00125-0 2022

  11. [11]

    Artifacts at Cardiac CT: Physics and Solutions

    Kalisz K, Buethe J, Saboo SS, Abbara S, Halliburton S, Rajiah P. Artifacts at Cardiac CT: Physics and Solutions. Radiographics. 2016;36(7):2064-83. Epub 20161021. doi: 10.1148/rg.2016160079. PubMed PMID: 27768543

    work page doi:10.1148/rg.2016160079 2016

  12. [12]

    Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography- Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis

    Xu B, Tu S, Qiao S, Qu X, Chen Y, Yang J, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Angiography- Based Quantitative Flow Ratio Measurements for Online Assessment of Coronary Stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70(25):3077-87. Epub 20171031. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.035. PubMed PMID: 29101020

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2017.10.035 2017

  13. [13]

    Angiographic quantitative flow ratio- guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial

    Xu B, Tu S, Song L, Jin Z, Yu B, Fu G, et al. Angiographic quantitative flow ratio- guided coronary intervention (FAVOR III China): a multicentre, randomised, sham-controlled trial. Lancet. 2021;398(10317):2149-59. Epub 20211104. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(21)02248-0. PubMed PMID: 34742368

    work page doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(21)02248-0 2021

  14. [14]

    Comparison Between the Performance of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Perfusion Imaging for Diagnosing Myocardial Ischemia

    van Diemen PA, Driessen RS, Kooistra RA, Stuijfzand WJ, Raijmakers PG, Boellaard R, et al. Comparison Between the Performance of Quantitative Flow Ratio and Perfusion Imaging for Diagnosing Myocardial Ischemia. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2020;13(9):1976-85. Epub 20200415. doi: 10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.02.012. PubMed PMID: 32305469

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2020.02.012 2020

  15. [15]

    Real-World Comparison of FFR and QFR: New Perspectives on the Functional Assessment of Coronary Stenoses

    Gál R, Csanádi B, Ferenci T, Bora N, Piróth Z. Real-World Comparison of FFR and QFR: New Perspectives on the Functional Assessment of Coronary Stenoses. J Clin Med. 2025;14(17). Epub 20250822. doi: 10.3390/jcm14175946. PubMed PMID: 40943705; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC12429222

    work page doi:10.3390/jcm14175946 2025

  16. [16]

    Cardiovascular Mathematics: Modeling and Simulation of the Circulatory System2009

    Formaggia L, Quarteroni A, Veneziani A. Cardiovascular Mathematics: Modeling and Simulation of the Circulatory System2009

    work page

  17. [17]

    The arterial Windkessel

    Westerhof N, Lankhaar JW, Westerhof BE. The arterial Windkessel. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2009;47(2):131-41. Epub 20080610. doi: 10.1007/s11517-008-0359-2. PubMed PMID: 18543011

    work page doi:10.1007/s11517-008-0359-2 2009

  18. [18]

    Patient-specific modeling of cardiovascular mechanics

    Taylor CA, Figueroa CA. Patient-specific modeling of cardiovascular mechanics. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2009;11:109-34. doi: 10.1146/annurev.bioeng.10.061807.160521. PubMed PMID: 19400706; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC4581431

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.bioeng.10.061807.160521 2009

  19. [19]

    One-dimensional models for blood flow in arteries

    Formaggia L, Lamponi D, Quarteroni A. One-dimensional models for blood flow in arteries. Journal of Engineering Mathematics. 2003;47(3):251-76. doi: 10.1023/B:ENGI.0000007980.01347.29

    work page doi:10.1023/b:engi.0000007980.01347.29 2003

  20. [20]

    On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks

    Guo C, Pleiss G, Sun Y, Weinberger KQ. On Calibration of Modern Neural Networks. 2017

    work page 2017

  21. [21]

    Kendall A, Gal Y. What uncertainties do we need in Bayesian deep learning for computer vision? Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems; Long Beach, California, USA: Curran Associates Inc.; 2017. p. 5580–90

    work page 2017

  22. [22]

    Can you trust your model's uncertainty? evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift

    Ovadia Y, Fertig E, Ren J, Nado Z, Sculley D, Nowozin S, et al. Can you trust your model's uncertainty? evaluating predictive uncertainty under dataset shift. Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems: Curran Associates Inc.; 2019. p. Article 1254

    work page 2019

  23. [23]

    Domain Generalization: A Survey

    Zhou K, Liu Z, Qiao Y, Xiang T, Loy CC. Domain Generalization: A Survey. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell. 2023;45(4):4396–415. doi: 10.1109/tpami.2022.3195549

    work page doi:10.1109/tpami.2022.3195549 2023

  24. [24]

    Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations

    Raissi M, Perdikaris P, Karniadakis GE. Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations. Journal of Computational Physics. 2019;378:686-707. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045 2019

  25. [25]

    Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) for fluid mechanics: a review

    Cai S, Mao Z, Wang Z, Yin M, Karniadakis GE. Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) for fluid mechanics: a review. Acta Mechanica Sinica. 2021;37(12):1727-38. doi: 10.1007/s10409-021-01148-1

    work page doi:10.1007/s10409-021-01148-1 2021

  26. [26]

    Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric Partial Differential Equations

    Li Z, Kovachki N, Azizzadenesheli K, Liu B, Bhattacharya K, Stuart A, et al. Fourier Neural Operator for Parametric Partial Differential Equations. arXiv; 2020

    work page 2020

  27. [27]

    Physics-Informed Neural Operator for Learning Partial Differential Equations

    Li Z, Zheng H, Kovachki N, Jin D, Chen H, Liu B, et al. Physics-Informed Neural Operator for Learning Partial Differential Equations. ACM / IMS J Data Sci. 2024;1(3):Article 9. doi: 10.1145/3648506

    work page doi:10.1145/3648506 2024

  28. [28]

    Machine Learning–Based CT Angiography–Derived Fractional Flow Reserve for Diagnosis of Functionally Significant Coronary Artery Disease

    An Z, Tian J, Zhao X, Zhang M, Zhang L, Yang X, et al. Machine Learning–Based CT Angiography–Derived Fractional Flow Reserve for Diagnosis of Functionally Significant Coronary Artery Disease. JACC: Cardiovascular Imaging. 2023;16(3):401-4. doi: doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2023.01.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcmg.2023.01.002 2023

  29. [29]

    Diagnostic Accuracy of a Machine-Learning Approach to Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: Result From the MACHINE Consortium

    Coenen A, Kim YH, Kruk M, Tesche C, De Geer J, Kurata A, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of a Machine-Learning Approach to Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography-Based Fractional Flow Reserve: Result From the MACHINE Consortium. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2018;11(6):e007217. doi: 10.1161/circimaging.117.007217. PubMed PMID: 29914866

    work page doi:10.1161/circimaging.117.007217 2018

  30. [30]

    Coronary CT Angiography-derived Fractional Flow Reserve: Machine Learning Algorithm versus Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling

    Tesche C, De Cecco CN, Baumann S, Renker M, McLaurin TW, Duguay TM, et al. Coronary CT Angiography-derived Fractional Flow Reserve: Machine Learning Algorithm versus Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling. Radiology. 2018;288(1):64-72. Epub 20180410. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2018171291. PubMed PMID: 29634438

    work page doi:10.1148/radiol.2018171291 2018

  31. [31]

    Angiography-Based Machine Learning for Predicting Fractional Flow Reserve in Intermediate Coronary Artery Lesions

    Cho H, Lee JG, Kang SJ, Kim WJ, Choi SY, Ko J, et al. Angiography-Based Machine Learning for Predicting Fractional Flow Reserve in Intermediate Coronary Artery Lesions. J Am Heart Assoc. 2019;8(4):e011685. doi: 10.1161/jaha.118.011685. PubMed PMID: 30764731; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6405668

    work page doi:10.1161/jaha.118.011685 2019

  32. [32]

    Hemodynamics modeling with physics-informed neural networks: A progressive boundary complexity approach

    Chen X, Yang J, Liu X, He Y, Luo Q, Chen M, et al. Hemodynamics modeling with physics-informed neural networks: A progressive boundary complexity approach. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2025;438:117851. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2025.117851

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2025.117851 2025

  33. [33]

    Comparison of 1D and 3D Models for the Estimation of Fractional Flow Reserve

    Blanco PJ, Bulant CA, Müller LO, Talou GDM, Bezerra CG, Lemos PA, et al. Comparison of 1D and 3D Models for the Estimation of Fractional Flow Reserve. Sci Rep. 2018;8(1):17275. Epub 20181122. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-35344-0. PubMed PMID: 30467321; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC6250665

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-018-35344-0 2018

  34. [34]

    One-dimensional modeling of fractional flow reserve in coronary artery disease: Uncertainty quantification and Bayesian optimization

    Yin M, Yazdani A, Karniadakis GE. One-dimensional modeling of fractional flow reserve in coronary artery disease: Uncertainty quantification and Bayesian optimization. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering. 2019;353:66-85. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2019.05.005

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cma.2019.05.005 2019

  35. [35]

    The influence of model order reduction on the computed fractional flow reserve using parameterized coronary geometries

    Gashi K, Bosboom EMH, van de Vosse FN. The influence of model order reduction on the computed fractional flow reserve using parameterized coronary geometries. J Biomech. 2019;82:313-23. Epub 20181114. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.11.008. PubMed PMID: 30471791

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2018.11.008 2019

  36. [36]

    Morris PD, Ryan D, Morton AC, Lycett R, Lawford PV, Hose DR, et al. Virtual fractional flow reserve from coronary angiography: modeling the significance of coronary lesions: results from the VIRTU-1 (VIRTUal Fractional Flow Reserve From Coronary Angiography) study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2013;6(2):149-57. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2012.08.024. PubMed PMID: 23428006

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2012.08.024 2013

  37. [37]

    Tu S, Barbato E, Köszegi Z, Yang J, Sun Z, Holm NR, et al. Fractional flow reserve calculation from 3-dimensional quantitative coronary angiography and TIMI frame count: a fast computer model to quantify the functional significance of moderately obstructed coronary arteries. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014;7(7):768-77. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.03.004. PubMed...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2014.03.004 2014

  38. [38]

    Fast Virtual Fractional Flow Reserve Based Upon Steady-State Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis: Results From the VIRTU-Fast Study

    Morris PD, Silva Soto DA, Feher JFA, Rafiroiu D, Lungu A, Varma S, et al. Fast Virtual Fractional Flow Reserve Based Upon Steady-State Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis: Results From the VIRTU-Fast Study. JACC Basic Transl Sci. 2017;2(4):434-46. Epub 20170828. doi: 10.1016/j.jacbts.2017.04.003. PubMed PMID: 28920099; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC5582193

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jacbts.2017.04.003 2017

  39. [39]

    Uncertainty quantification in coronary blood flow simulations: Impact of geometry, boundary conditions and blood viscosity

    Sankaran S, Kim HJ, Choi G, Taylor CA. Uncertainty quantification in coronary blood flow simulations: Impact of geometry, boundary conditions and blood viscosity. J Biomech. 2016;49(12):2540-7. Epub 20160109. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.01.002. PubMed PMID: 26803339

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.01.002 2016

  40. [40]

    Should We Revisit the Clinical Value of Fractional Flow Reserve in the Era of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction? Biomedicines

    Pintea Bentea G, Awada A, Berdaoui B. Should We Revisit the Clinical Value of Fractional Flow Reserve in the Era of Coronary Microvascular Dysfunction? Biomedicines. 2025;13(5). Epub 20250430. doi: 10.3390/biomedicines13051086. PubMed PMID: 40426914; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC12108706

    work page doi:10.3390/biomedicines13051086 2025

  41. [41]

    Intraspecific scaling laws of vascular trees

    Huo Y, Kassab GS. Intraspecific scaling laws of vascular trees. J R Soc Interface. 2012;9(66):190-200. Epub 20110615. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2011.0270. PubMed PMID: 21676970; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3223633

    work page doi:10.1098/rsif.2011.0270 2012

  42. [42]

    Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) for the assessment of stenosis severity: the FAST II study

    Masdjedi K, Tanaka N, Van Belle E, Porouchani S, Linke A, Woitek FJ, et al. Vessel fractional flow reserve (vFFR) for the assessment of stenosis severity: the FAST II study. EuroIntervention. 2022;17(18):1498-505. doi: 10.4244/eij-d-21-00471. PubMed PMID: 34647890; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9896401

    work page doi:10.4244/eij-d-21-00471 2022

  43. [43]

    Diagnostic Accuracy of Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Flow Reserve From Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: The International Multicenter FAVOR Pilot Study

    Tu S, Westra J, Yang J, von Birgelen C, Ferrara A, Pellicano M, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Fast Computational Approaches to Derive Fractional Flow Reserve From Diagnostic Coronary Angiography: The International Multicenter FAVOR Pilot Study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2016;9(19):2024-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.013. PubMed PMID: 27712739

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcin.2016.07.013 2016

  44. [44]

    Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography

    Fearon WF, Achenbach S, Engstrom T, Assali A, Shlofmitz R, Jeremias A, et al. Accuracy of Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography. Circulation. 2019;139(4):477-84. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.037350

    work page doi:10.1161/circulationaha.118.037350 2019

  45. [45]

    Rapid and Precise Computation of Fractional Flow Reserve from Routine Two-Dimensional Coronary Angiograms Based on Fluid Mechanics: The Pilot FFR2D Study

    Tsigkas GG, Bourantas GC, Moulias A, Karamasis GV, Bekiris FV, Davlouros P, et al. Rapid and Precise Computation of Fractional Flow Reserve from Routine Two-Dimensional Coronary Angiograms Based on Fluid Mechanics: The Pilot FFR2D Study. J Clin Med. 2024;13(13). Epub 20240629. doi: 10.3390/jcm13133831. PubMed PMID: 38999397; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC11242488

    work page doi:10.3390/jcm13133831 2024

  46. [46]

    Diagnostic performance of virtual fractional flow reserve derived from routine coronary angiography using segmentation free reduced order (1-dimensional) flow modelling

    Mohee K, Mynard JP, Dhunnoo G, Davies R, Nithiarasu P, Halcox JP, et al. Diagnostic performance of virtual fractional flow reserve derived from routine coronary angiography using segmentation free reduced order (1-dimensional) flow modelling. JRSM Cardiovasc Dis. 2020;9:2048004020967578. Epub 20201105. doi: 10.1177/2048004020967578. PubMed PMID: 33224482;...

    work page doi:10.1177/2048004020967578 2020

  47. [47]

    Validation of a Novel Computational Fluid Dynamics Based Method for Assessing Intracoronary Flow: Combining Coronary Angiography and Fractional Flow Reserve

    Xie X, Li N, Yu T, Pu W, Lin H, Li X, et al. Validation of a Novel Computational Fluid Dynamics Based Method for Assessing Intracoronary Flow: Combining Coronary Angiography and Fractional Flow Reserve. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2025;105(7):1695-706. Epub 20250326. doi: 10.1002/ccd.31498. PubMed PMID: 40136007

    work page doi:10.1002/ccd.31498 2025

  48. [48]

    High- Speed On-Site Deep Learning-Based FFR-CT Algorithm: Evaluation Using Invasive Angiography as the Reference Standard

    Giannopoulos AA, Keller L, Sepulcri D, Boehm R, Garefa C, Venugopal P, et al. High- Speed On-Site Deep Learning-Based FFR-CT Algorithm: Evaluation Using Invasive Angiography as the Reference Standard. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2023;221(4):460-70. Epub 20230503. doi: 10.2214/ajr.23.29156. PubMed PMID: 37132550

    work page doi:10.2214/ajr.23.29156 2023

  49. [49]

    Performance assessment of computed tomographic angiography fractional flow reserve using deep learning: SMART trial summary

    Zhang W, Yin YB, Wang ZQ, Zhao YX, Shi DM, Guo YH, et al. Performance assessment of computed tomographic angiography fractional flow reserve using deep learning: SMART trial summary. J Geriatr Cardiol. 2025;22(9):793-801. doi: 10.26599/1671- 5411.2025.09.002. PubMed PMID: 41143164; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC12547420

    work page doi:10.26599/1671- 2025

  50. [50]

    Narimani-Javid R, Moradi M, Mahalleh M, Najafi-Vosough R, Arzhangzadeh A, Khalique O, et al. Machine learning and computational fluid dynamics derived FFRCT demonstrate comparable diagnostic performance in patients with coronary artery disease; A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2025;19(2):232-46. Epub 20250222. doi: 10.101...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2025.02.004 2025

  51. [51]

    The diagnostic performance of machine learning-based FFRCT for coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis

    Lian R, Zhang X. The diagnostic performance of machine learning-based FFRCT for coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis. Open Med (Wars). 2025;20(1):20251320. Epub 20251104. doi: 10.1515/med-2025-1320. PubMed PMID: 41216194; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC12596863

    work page doi:10.1515/med-2025-1320 2025

  52. [52]

    Deep learning-based detection of functionally significant stenosis in coronary CT angiography

    Hampe N, van Velzen SGM, Planken RN, Henriques JPS, Collet C, Aben JP, et al. Deep learning-based detection of functionally significant stenosis in coronary CT angiography. Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022;9:964355. Epub 20221115. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.964355. PubMed PMID: 36457806; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC9705580

    work page doi:10.3389/fcvm.2022.964355 2022

  53. [53]

    Squeeze-and-Excitation Networks

    Hu J, Shen L, Sun G, editors. Squeeze-and-Excitation Networks. 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition; 2018 18-23 June 2018

    work page 2018

  54. [54]

    CBAM: Convolutional Block Attention Module

    Woo S, Park J, Lee J-Y, Kweon IS. CBAM: Convolutional Block Attention Module. 2018

    work page 2018

  55. [55]

    Novel deep learning CCTA-FFR for detecting functionally significant coronary stenosis: Comparison with iFR

    Roshan MP, Gigliotti GV, Gonzalez J, Cury RA, Lamy C, Sayegh K, et al. Novel deep learning CCTA-FFR for detecting functionally significant coronary stenosis: Comparison with iFR. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2026. Epub 20260109. doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2025.12.007. PubMed PMID: 41519628

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jcct.2025.12.007 2026

  56. [56]

    Machine Learning From Quantitative Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Predicts Fractional Flow Reserve-Defined Ischemia and Impaired Myocardial Blood Flow

    Lin A, van Diemen PA, Motwani M, McElhinney P, Otaki Y, Han D, et al. Machine Learning From Quantitative Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography Predicts Fractional Flow Reserve-Defined Ischemia and Impaired Myocardial Blood Flow. Circ Cardiovasc Imaging. 2022;15(10):e014369. Epub 20221013. doi: 10.1161/circimaging.122.014369. PubMed PMID: 36252116; PubM...

    work page doi:10.1161/circimaging.122.014369 2022

  57. [57]

    High performance neural network for solving coronary artery flow velocity field based on fluid component concentration

    Li B, Sun H, Yang Y, Fan L, Li X, Liu J, et al. High performance neural network for solving coronary artery flow velocity field based on fluid component concentration. Physics of Fluids. 2025

    work page 2025

  58. [58]

    Convolutional LSTM Network: a machine learning approach for precipitation nowcasting

    Shi X, Chen Z, Wang H, Yeung D-Y, Wong W-k, Woo W-c. Convolutional LSTM Network: a machine learning approach for precipitation nowcasting. Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems - Volume 1; Montreal, Canada: MIT Press; 2015. p. 802–10

    work page 2015

  59. [59]

    An Empirical Evaluation of Generic Convolutional and Recurrent Networks for Sequence Modeling

    Bai S, Kolter J, Koltun V. An Empirical Evaluation of Generic Convolutional and Recurrent Networks for Sequence Modeling. 2018. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1803.01271

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1803.01271 2018

  60. [60]

    Non-invasive fractional flow reserve estimation using deep learning on intermediate left anterior descending coronary artery lesion angiography images

    Arefinia F, Aria M, Rabiei R, Hosseini A, Ghaemian A, Roshanpoor A. Non-invasive fractional flow reserve estimation using deep learning on intermediate left anterior descending coronary artery lesion angiography images. Sci Rep. 2024;14(1):1818. Epub 20240120. doi: 10.1038/s41598-024-52360-5. PubMed PMID: 38245614; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10799954

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-024-52360-5 2024

  61. [61]

    A Convolutional-Transformer Model for FFR and iFR Assessment From Coronary Angiography

    Mineo R, Salanitri FP, Bellitto G, Kavasidis I, Filippo O, Millesimo M, et al. A Convolutional-Transformer Model for FFR and iFR Assessment From Coronary Angiography. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2024;43(8):2866-77. Epub 20240801. doi: 10.1109/tmi.2024.3383283. PubMed PMID: 38954582

    work page doi:10.1109/tmi.2024.3383283 2024

  62. [62]

    Performance of a novel artificial intelligence software developed to derive coronary fractional flow reserve values from diagnostic angiograms

    Ben-Assa E, Abu Salman A, Cafri C, Roguin A, Hellou E, Koifman E, et al. Performance of a novel artificial intelligence software developed to derive coronary fractional flow reserve values from diagnostic angiograms. Coron Artery Dis. 2023;34(8):533-41. Epub 20231018. doi: 10.1097/mca.0000000000001305. PubMed PMID: 37855304; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC10602213

    work page doi:10.1097/mca.0000000000001305 2023

  63. [63]

    CorNet: A deep learning method based on physics-guided and attention mechanism for predicting flow field of coronary arterial tree

    Liu X, Cai S, Lin H, Liu X, Hu X, Zhang L, et al. CorNet: A deep learning method based on physics-guided and attention mechanism for predicting flow field of coronary arterial tree. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence. 2025;159:111460. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engappai.2025.111460

    work page doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2025.111460 2025

  64. [64]

    A review on machine learning for arterial extraction and quantitative assessment on invasive coronary angiograms

    Baral P, Zhao C, Esposito M, Zhou W. A review on machine learning for arterial extraction and quantitative assessment on invasive coronary angiograms. 2024

    work page 2024

  65. [65]

    Three-Dimensional Physics-Informed Neural Network Simulation in Coronary Artery Trees

    Alzhanov N, Ng EYK, Zhao Y. Three-Dimensional Physics-Informed Neural Network Simulation in Coronary Artery Trees. Fluids. 2024;9(7):153. PubMed PMID: doi:10.3390/fluids9070153

    work page doi:10.3390/fluids9070153 2024

  66. [66]

    Conditional Physics- Informed Graph Neural Network for Fractional Flow Reserve Assessment

    Xie B, Liu X, Zhang H, Xu C, Zeng T, Yuan Y, et al., editors. Conditional Physics- Informed Graph Neural Network for Fractional Flow Reserve Assessment. Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention – MICCAI 2023; 2023 2023//; Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland

    work page 2023

  67. [67]

    Bi-variational physics-informed operator network for fractional flow reserve curve assessment from coronary angiography

    Xie B, Zhang H, Wang A, Liu X, Gao Z. Bi-variational physics-informed operator network for fractional flow reserve curve assessment from coronary angiography. Medical Image Analysis. 2025;103:103564. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.media.2025.103564

    work page doi:10.1016/j.media.2025.103564 2025

  68. [68]

    Physics- informed self-supervised learning for predictive modeling of coronary artery digital twins

    Sun X, Mahendiran T, Senouf OY, Auberson D, Bruyne BD, Fournier S, et al. Physics- informed self-supervised learning for predictive modeling of coronary artery digital twins. ArXiv. 2025;abs/2512.03055

    work page arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Diagnostic Accuracy of Computational Fluid Dynamics-Based Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography: The ACCURATE Study

    Jiang J, Hu Y, Li C, Dong L, Xu J, Tang L, et al. Diagnostic Accuracy of Computational Fluid Dynamics-Based Fractional Flow Reserve Derived From Coronary Angiography: The ACCURATE Study. J Am Heart Assoc. 2025;14(1):e035672. Epub 20241224. doi: 10.1161/jaha.124.035672. PubMed PMID: 39719423; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC12054519

    work page doi:10.1161/jaha.124.035672 2025

  70. [70]

    Pressure-flow characteristics of coronary stenoses in unsedated dogs at rest and during coronary vasodilation

    Gould KL. Pressure-flow characteristics of coronary stenoses in unsedated dogs at rest and during coronary vasodilation. Circulation Research. 1978;43(2):242-253

    work page 1978

  71. [71]

    Pressure drop across artificially induced stenoses in the femoral arteries of dogs

    Young DF, Cholvin NR, Roth AC. Pressure drop across artificially induced stenoses in the femoral arteries of dogs. Circulation Research. 1975;36(6):735-743

    work page 1975

  72. [72]

    One-dimensional models for blood flow in arteries

    Formaggia L, Lamponi D, Quarteroni A. One-dimensional models for blood flow in arteries. J Eng Math. 2003;47(3-4):251-276

    work page 2003

  73. [73]

    Hybrid CFD–PINN–FSI simulation in coronary artery trees

    Alzhanov N, Ng EYK, Zhao Y. Hybrid CFD–PINN–FSI simulation in coronary artery trees. Fluids. 2024;9(12):280

    work page 2024

  74. [74]

    Automated generation of 0D and 1D reduced-order models of patient-specific blood flow

    Pfaller MR, Pham J, Verma A, Pegolotti L, Wilson NM, Parker DW, Yang W, Marsden AL. Automated generation of 0D and 1D reduced-order models of patient-specific blood flow. Int J Numer Methods Biomed Eng. 2022;38(10):e3639

    work page 2022

  75. [75]

    De Bruyne B, Sarma J Fractional flow reserve: a review Heart 2008;94:949-959

    work page 2008