Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) tools have been extensively applied to study the hemodynamics in the total cavopulmonary connection (TCPC) in patients with only a single functioning ventricle. Without the contraction of a sub-pulmonary ventricle, pulsatility of flow through this connection is low and variable across patients, which is usually neglected in most numerical modeling studies. Recent studies suggest that such pulsatility can be non-negligible and can be important in hemodynamic predictions. The goal of this work is to compare the results of an in-house numerical methodology for simulating pulsatile TCPC flow with experimental results. Digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV) was acquired on TCPC in vitro models to evaluate the capability of the CFD tool in predicting pulsatile TCPC flow fields. In vitro hemodynamic measurements were used to compare the numerical prediction of power loss across the connection. The results demonstrated the complexity of the pulsatile TCPC flow fields and the validity of the numerical approach in simulating pulsatile TCPC flow dynamics in both idealized and complex patient specific models.

Total cavopulmonary connection is the result of a series of palliative surgical repairs performed on patients with single ventricle heart defects. The resulting anatomy has complex and unsteady hemodynamics characterized by flow mixing and flow separation. Although varying degrees of flow pulsatility have been observed in vivo, non-pulsatile (time-averaged) boundary conditions have traditionally been assumed in hemodynamic modeling, and only recently have pulsatile conditions been incorporated without completely characterizing their effect or importance. In this study, 3D numerical simulations with both pulsatile and non-pulsatile boundary conditions were performed for 24 patients with different anatomies and flow boundary conditions from Georgia Tech database. Flow structures, energy dissipation rates and pressure drops were compared under rest and simulated exercise conditions. It was found that flow pulsatility is the primary factor in determining the appropriate choice of boundary conditions, whereas the anatomic configuration and cardiac output had secondary effects. Results show that the hemodynamics can be strongly influenced by the presence of pulsatile flow. However, there was a minimum pulsatility threshold, identified by defining a weighted pulsatility index (wPI), above which the influence was significant. It was shown that when wPI < 30%, the relative error in hemodynamic predictions using time-averaged boundary conditions was less than 10% compared to pulsatile simulations. In addition, when wPI < 50, the relative error was less than 20%. A correlation was introduced to relate wPI to the relative error in predicting the flow metrics with non-pulsatile flow conditions.