Final report
Dates and location
29 August — 31 August 2017, Lille,France
Chairperson
Mathias Brieu
Co-chairperson
E. Leriche, S. Sherwin and S. Bordas
Conference fees
- Regular registration fee: 500.00 €
- PhD Reduced fee (only for scholarship winners): 300.00 €
What other funding was obtained?
Medtronic sponsoring : 1000 €
What were the participants offered?
2 breakfast, 2 lunch, 1 dinner, 4 coffee break
Applicants (members)
- Patrick Chabrand
- Jérôme Molimard
- Yannick Tillier
Applicants (non members)
- Pablo Alvarez
- Laure Astruc
- Chloe Audebert
- Aline Bel-Brunon
- Kay Brosien
- Jan Brüning
- Marek Bucki
- Huu Phuoc Bui
- Audrey Chenel
- Franz Chouly
- Mathias Donnez
- Michel Duprez
- Christian Duriez
- Aüllo-Rasser Gaétan
- Doridam Jennifer
- Ruyang Li
- Aurelien Macron
- Jorge Mariscal Harana
- Annie Morch
- Fanny Morin
- Hélène Pillet
- Virginie Rampal
- Jean-Baptiste Renault
- Pierre-Yves Rohan
- Marco Sensale
- Katharina Vellguth
- Phuoc Vy
- Andrea Westervelt
Scientific report
Development in Biomechanics and computer assisted surgery are tremendous. Several researchers are working on approaches to improve and optimize medical treatments. Personalized medical treatment is the final issue of such research. However, the key issue of patient-specific treatment is the final validation with comparison to the medical reality.
Scientist want to develop patient-specific in-silico simulation mimicking the medical reality with the highest accuracy in order to improve treatments. In each cases, pathology, the key questions the scientists have to answer to is how to simplify the medical reality and model the anatomy, the geometries of the considered structures in interaction, the numerical model, the mechanical model and behaviour laws. Comparison to medical reality leads researcher to be faced to clinical measurements and clinical trials, with lower sensitivity, accuracy and uncertainties.
The aim of the Euromech colloquium 595 was to allow for an exchange of ideas, approach and methodologies on the recent developments; experimental, modelling or numerical approaches; in this field dealing with fluid and solids. There were 38 participants and 36 presentations. Among them four key-note lectures, namely, Karol Miller (University of Western Australia), Irène Vignon-Clementel (INRIA Paris & Sorbonne Université UPMC), Abdul Barakat (Ecole Polytechnique) and Hervé Delingette (INRIA Sophia Antipolis). The list of the participants and the full program are joined to this report. Several informal discussions have also occurred between participants.
The presentations and the discussions addressed 4 major issues:
- From experimental tests to constitutive models
Presentations highlighted the tremendous differences between the constitutive models, trying to model every contribution of every scales of soft tissues, and the experimental ability to measure an effective sensitivity to every parameter. Despite the considerable progress of destructive and nondestructive mechanical characterization it seems, to the participants understanding, more pragmatic to differentiate the first order parameters, which influence can be identified, from second order parameters, which influence might not be identified and to simplify as much as possible the constitutive models to be applicable in a high dispersion medical context.
- From medical images to numerical simulations
The key of patient-specific simulation, and patient-specific treatment, aims in the ability to obtain a numerical model directly from medical imaging. The medical images, obtain in a clinical environment and not in a research environment, are of low resolution. The main difficulty stems thus in the ability to obtain an accurate geometric and mechanical model from such low resolution medical images. Participants presented several methods to identify the geometry of the anatomical complex studied. In each case resolution was the key problem. Several works introduced manufactured physical model, silico models, observed towards medical imaging equipment to estimate the resolution of the reconstruction technics. Silico models seems to be a solution to estimate numerical accuracy of patient-specific numerical simulation.
- From model to numerical simulations
Constitutive models and numerical simulations must be gathered and use to simulate patient-specific cases. This leads to simulation with a very huge number of parameters coming from on one hand constitutive models and on the other hand geometric models. The resolution of the numerical models; degrees of freedom of finite element meshes, parameters of the numerical algorithms to solve nonlinear problems; are also added parameters. The sensitivity and the accuracy of the final results to that huge numbers of parameters has also been questioned.
- Real-time & planning surgery simulations
In a planning-surgery context, numerical simulations should be real-rime to fulfill the expectation of surgeons. In such a context, the huge number of parameters, or degrees of freedom, of a problem is an issue. Reaching real-time simulation requires reducing as much as possible the number of parameters. However, the requirements of accurate simulation, being compared to medical reality, requires a high fidelity of simulation. The balance between reducing the resolution of models to reach real-time simulations and increasing the accuracy of models to reach bio-fidelity has been addressed during the colloquium. Physical model, manufactured in silico while mimicking physiologic or physio-pathologic cases, seems to be a direction of development to estimate the balance between speed-up and resolution in real-time simulation.
The Euromech colloquium 595 has a very good opportunity for the community of biomechanics facing to application and medical reality to share experience and discuss about their applications and problems. Several members of the colloquium enjoyed the exchange and wish to join again in 2 years.
The Euromech colloquium 595 is also leading to a book series “Biomechanics and Computer – Assisted Surgery Meets Medical Reality”, being published by Springer in 2017 with selected contributions.
Number of participants from each country
| Country | Participants |
|---|---|
| France | 23 |
| Germany | 3 |
| Luxembourg | 2 |
| China | 1 |
| United Kingdom | 1 |
| United States | 1 |
| Total | 31 |