ArticleFrontiers in physiology2020
Numerical Simulation of Hemodynamics in Two Models for Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection Surgery.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Computational Predictive Modeling of Surgical Outcomes in Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection: Assessing the Impact of Pulmonary Venous Confluence Size on Preoperative Planning.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2026Article
- Numerical modeling assisting in surgical treatment of total anomalous pulmonary venous connection in children.World journal of pediatric surgery · 2024Article
- Fluid-Structure Interaction Model for Predicting Surgical Result of Total Anomalous Pulmonary Venous Connection and Estimating Pulmonary Venous Properties.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo numerically compare the prospective hemodynamic outcomes between a new window surgery and a traditional surgery in the treatment of supracardiac total anomalous pulmonary venous connection (S-TAPVC).
methodsA 3D geometry model, composed of pulmonary vein (PV) and left atrium (LA), was reconstructed based on summarized data with S-TAPVC. Two surgery models were established based on this model. One is the traditional surgery model, where an elliptical anastomosis was created by incising and stitching the LA and the common vein (CV) along the axis of the CV. The other is the new window surgery model, where the CV was incised with an H-shaped orifice, and LA was incised with a transposed H-shaped orifice, and then the orifice edges were stitched like a window. Two models with a relative cross sectional area (RCSA) of 300 mm
resultsWindow surgery presented a lower blood flow velocity, pressure difference, and the WSS at the anastomosis, compared to traditional surgery. In terms of energy loss, the power conversion efficiency of window surgery was significantly higher than that of traditional surgery, with 66.8% and 53.5%, respectively.
conclusionThe new window surgery demonstrates a lower pressure difference of anastomosis and higher energy conversion efficiency, which may be a better choice compared with the traditional surgery for S-TAPVC patient.
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.