ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2019
Analysis of Inlet Velocity Profiles in Numerical Assessment of Fontan Hemodynamics.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.
- Non-Newtonian Effects on Patient-Specific Modeling of Fontan Hemodynamics.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2020Trial
- Modeling Techniques and Boundary Conditions in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Analysis: Latest Developments in Simulation and Integration of Machine Learning and Data-Driven Approaches.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Multiphysiologic State Computational Fluid Dynamics Modeling for Planning Fontan With Interrupted Inferior Vena Cava.JACC. Advances · 2024Article
- Influence of Pulsatility and Inflow Waveforms on Tracheal Airflow Dynamics in Healthy Older Adults.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2023Article
- Method for estimating pulsatile wall shear stress from one-dimensional velocity waveforms.Physiological reports · 2023Article
- Computational Fluid Dynamics Support for Fontan Planning in Minutes, Not Hours: The Next Step in Clinical Pre-Interventional Simulations.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2022Article
- Computational Investigation of Anastomosis Options of a Right-Heart Pump to Patient Specific Pulmonary Arteries.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2022Article
- Is Doppler Echocardiography Adequate for Surgical Planning of Single Ventricle Patients?Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2021Article
- Engineering Perspective on Cardiovascular Simulations of Fontan Hemodynamics: Where Do We Stand with a Look Towards Clinical Application.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2021Article
- A Simplified In Silico Model of Left Ventricular Outflow in Patients After Transcatheter Mitral Valve Replacement with Anterior Leaflet Laceration.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2021Article
- Article
- Impact of Free-Breathing Phase-Contrast MRI on Decision-Making in Fontan Surgical Planning.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2020Article
- Comparison of Fontan Surgical Options for Patients with Apicocaval Juxtaposition.Pediatric cardiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations are widely utilized to assess Fontan hemodynamics that are related to long-term complications. No previous studies have systemically investigated the effects of using different inlet velocity profiles in Fontan simulations. This study implements real, patient-specific velocity profiles for numerical assessment of Fontan hemodynamics using CFD simulations. Four additional, artificial velocity profiles were used for comparison: (1) flat, (2) parabolic, (3) Womersley, and (4) parabolic with inlet extensions [to develop flow before entering the total cavopulmonary connection (TCPC)]. The differences arising from the five velocity profiles, as well as discrepancies between the real and each of the artificial velocity profiles, were quantified by examining clinically important metrics in TCPC hemodynamics: power loss (PL), viscous dissipation rate (VDR), hepatic flow distribution, and regions of low wall shear stress. Statistically significant differences were observed in PL and VDR between simulations using real and flat velocity profiles, but differences between those using real velocity profiles and the other three artificial profiles did not reach statistical significance. These conclusions suggest that the artificial velocity profiles (2)-(4) are acceptable surrogates for real velocity profiles in Fontan simulations, but parabolic profiles are recommended because of their low computational demands and prevalent applicability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.