ArticleCardiovascular engineering and technology2022
Characterizing Intracranial Hemodynamics in Sickle Cell Anemia: Impact of Patient-Specific Viscosity.
Article in Cardiovascular engineering and technology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis of Cerebrovascular Hemodynamic Differences in Adults with Sickle Cell Disease: Comparing Stroke and Non-Stroke Cohorts.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Flow Diversion for Intracranial Aneurysms in Patients with Hematologic Disorders.Neurointervention · 2025Article
- Computational Analysis of Flow and Transport Suggests Reduced Oxygen Levels Within Intracranial Aneurysms, Especially in Individuals With Sickle-Cell Disease.Journal of biomechanical engineering · 2025Article
- Intracranial aneurysms in sickle cell disease are associated with hemodynamic stress and anemia.Blood advances · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposePediatric and adult patients with sickle cell anemia (SCA) are at increased risk of stroke and cerebrovascular accident. In the general adult population, there is a relationship between arterial hemodynamics and pathology; however, this relationship in SCA patients remains to be elucidated. The aim of this work was to characterize circle of Willis hemodynamics in patients with SCA and quantify the impact of viscosity choice on pathophysiologically-relevant hemodynamics measures.
methodsBased on measured vascular geometries, time-varying flow rates, and blood parameters, detailed patient-specific simulations of the circle of Willis were conducted for SCA patients (n = 6). Simulations quantified the impact of patient-specific and standard blood viscosities on wall shear stress (WSS).
resultsThese results demonstrated that use of a standard blood viscosity introduces large errors into the estimation of pathophysiologically-relevant hemodynamic parameters. Standard viscosity models overpredicted peak WSS by 55% and 49% for steady and pulsatile flow, respectively. Moreover, these results demonstrated non-uniform, spatial patterns of positive and negative WSS errors related to viscosity, and standard viscosity simulations overpredicted the time-averaged WSS by 32% (standard deviation = 7.1%). Finally, differences in shear rate demonstrated that the viscosity choice alters the simulated near-wall flow field, impacting hemodynamics measures.
conclusionsThis work presents simulations of circle of Willis arterial flow in SCA patients and demonstrates the importance and feasibility of using a patient-specific viscosity in these simulations. Accurately characterizing cerebrovascular hemodynamics in SCA populations has potential for elucidating the pathophysiology of large-vessel occlusion, aneurysms, and tissue damage in these patients.
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.