ArticleArtificial organs2020
Computational modeling of the Food and Drug Administration's benchmark centrifugal blood pump.
Article in Artificial organs, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Red blood cell deformation in a microfluidic sudden expansion at supraphysiological strain rates.Biophysical journal · 2026Article
- Ghost Cells as a Two-Phase Blood Analog Fluid-Optical Thrombus Growth Detection Using Particle Image Velocimetry.Artificial organs · 2025Article
- Ghost Cells as a Two-Phase Blood Analog Fluid -Fluorescent Mechanical Hemolysis Detection.Artificial organs · 2025Article
- Computational fluid dynamics simulating of the FDA benchmark blood pump with different coefficient sets and scaler shear stress models used in the power-law hemolysis model.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2025Article
- Hemocompatibility and hemodynamic comparison of two centrifugal LVADs: HVAD and HeartMate3.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2023Article
- Effect of left ventricular assist device on the hemodynamics of a patient-specific left heart.Medical & biological engineering & computing · 2022Article
- Distribution and history of extensional stresses on vWF surrogate molecules in turbulent flow.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Flow characteristics and hemolytic performance of the new Breethe centrifugal blood pump in comparison with the CentriMag and Rotaflow pumps.The International journal of artificial organs · 2021Article
- Equivalent Scalar Stress Formulation Taking into Account Non-Resolved Turbulent Scales.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
In order to simulate hemodynamics within centrifugal blood pumps and to predict pump hemolysis, CFD simulations must be thoroughly validated against experimental data. They must also account for and accurately model the specific working fluid in the pump, whether that is a blood-analog solution to match an experimental PIV study or animal blood in a hemolysis experiment. Therefore, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) benchmark centrifugal blood pump and its database of experimental PIV and hemolysis data were used to thoroughly validate CFD simulations of the same blood pump. A Newtonian blood model was first used to compare to the PIV data with a blood analog fluid while hemolysis data were compared using a power-law hemolysis model fit to porcine blood data. A viscoelastic blood model was then incorporated into the CFD solver to investigate the importance of modeling blood's viscoelasticity in centrifugal pumps. The established computational framework, including a dynamic rotating mesh, animal blood-specific fluid properties and hemolysis modeling, and a k-ω SST turbulence model, was shown to more accurately predict pump pressure heads, velocity fields, and hemolysis compared to previously published CFD studies of the FDA centrifugal pump. The CFD simulations were able to match the FDA pressure and hemolysis data for multiple pump operating conditions, with the CFD results being within the standard deviations of the experimental results. While CFD radial velocity profiles between the impeller blades also compared well to the PIV velocity results, more work is still needed to address the large variability among both experimental and computational predictions of velocity in the diffuser outlet jet. Small differences were observed between the Newtonian and viscoelastic blood models in pressure head and hemolysis at the higher flow rate cases (FDA Conditions 4 and 5) but were more significant at lower flow rate and pump impeller speeds (FDA Condition 1). These results suggest that the importance of accounting for blood's viscoelasticity may be dependent on the specific blood pump operating conditions. This detailed computational framework with improved modeling techniques and an extensive validation procedure will be used in future CFD studies of centrifugal blood pumps to aid in device design and predictions of their biological responses.
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.