Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20162466›Full record

ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2010

Patient-specific computational fluid dynamics: structured mesh generation from coronary angiography.

Gianluca De Santis, Peter Mortier, Matthieu De Beule, Patrick Segers, Pascal Verdonck, Benedict Verhegghe

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Assessing abdominal aorta narrowing using computational fluid dynamics.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2016
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Theoretical models for coronary vascular biomechanics: progress & challenges.Progress in biophysics and molecular biology · 2011
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Gianluca De SantisBiommeda, IBiTech, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium. gianluca.desantis@ugent.be
Peter Mortier
Matthieu De Beule
Patrick Segers
Pascal Verdonck
Benedict Verhegghe

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Patient-specific simulations are widely used to investigate the local hemodynamics within realistic morphologies. However, pre-processing and mesh generation are time consuming, operator dependent, and the quality of the resulting mesh is often suboptimal. Therefore, a semi-automatic methodology for patient-specific reconstruction and structured meshing of a left coronary tree from biplane angiography is presented. Seven hexahedral grids have been generated with the new method (50,000-3,200,000 cells) and compared to nine unstructured tetrahedral grids with prismatic boundary layer (150,000-3,100,000 cells). Steady-state blood flow simulation using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) has been used to calculate the Wall Shear Stress (WSS). Our results (99 percentile, area-weighted and local WSS values along a line) demonstrate that hexahedral meshes with respect to tetrahedral/prismatic meshes converge better, and for the same accuracy of the result, six times less cells and 14 times less computational time are required. Hexahedral meshes are superior to tetrahedral/prismatic meshes and should be preferred for the calculation of the WSS.

Indexed as

Models, CardiovascularCoronary AngiographyCoronary Artery DiseaseHemorheologyHumansHydrodynamicsImage Interpretation, Computer-Assisted

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.