Effective Cell-Centred Time-Domain Maxwell's Equations Numerical Solvers

This research work analyses techniques for implementing a cell-centred finite-volume time-domain (ccFV-TD) computational methodology for the purpose of studying microwave heating. Various state-of-the-art spatial and temporal discretisation methods employed to solve Maxwell's equations on multidimensional structured grid networks are investigated, and the dispersive and dissipative errors inherent in those techniques examined. Both staggered and unstaggered grid approaches are considered. Upwind schemes using a Riemann solver and intensity vector splitting are studied and evaluated. Staggered and unstaggered Leapfrog and Runge-Kutta time integration methods are analysed in terms of phase and amplitude error to identify which method is the most accurate and efficient for simulating microwave heating processes. The implementation and migration of typical electromagnetic boundary conditions. from staggered in space to cell-centred approaches also is deliberated. In particular, an existing perfectly matched layer absorbing boundary methodology is adapted to formulate a new cell-centred boundary implementation for the ccFV-TD solvers. Finally for microwave heating purposes, a comparison of analytical and numerical results for standard case studies in rectangular waveguides allows the accuracy of the developed methods to be assessed.

Clinical Accuracy of the MedGem Indirect Calorimeter for Measuring Resting Energy Expenditure in Cancer Patients

OBJECTIVE: To compare, in patients with cancer and in healthy subjects, measured resting energy expenditure (REE) from traditional indirect calorimetry to a new portable device (MedGem) and predicted REE. DESIGN: Cross-sectional clinical validation study. SETTING: Private radiation oncology centre, Brisbane, Australia. SUBJECTS: Cancer patients (n = 18) and healthy subjects (n = 17) aged 37-86 y, with body mass indices ranging from 18 to 42 kg/m(2). INTERVENTIONS: Oxygen consumption (VO(2)) and REE were measured by VMax229 (VM) and MedGem (MG) indirect calorimeters in random order after a 12-h fast and 30-min rest. REE was also calculated from the MG without adjustment for nitrogen excretion (MGN) and estimated from Harris-Benedict prediction equations. Data were analysed using the Bland and Altman approach, based on a clinically acceptable difference between methods of 5%. RESULTS: The mean bias (MGN-VM) was 10% and limits of agreement were -42 to 21% for cancer patients; mean bias -5% with limits of -45 to 35% for healthy subjects. Less than half of the cancer patients (n = 7, 46.7%) and only a third (n = 5, 33.3%) of healthy subjects had measured REE by MGN within clinically acceptable limits of VM. Predicted REE showed a mean bias (HB-VM) of -5% for cancer patients and 4% for healthy subjects, with limits of agreement of -30 to 20% and -27 to 34%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Limits of agreement for the MG and Harris Benedict equations compared to traditional indirect calorimetry were similar but wide, indicating poor clinical accuracy for determining the REE of individual cancer patients and healthy subjects.