ArticleASAIO journal (American Society for Artificial Internal Organs : 1992)2022
Characterization and Development of Universal Ventricular Assist Device: Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis of Advanced Design.
Article in ASAIO journal (American Society for Artificial Internal Organs : 1992), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimization of secondary flow path clearance in centrifugal blood pump: a combined numerical and experimental study.Frontiers in physiology · 2025Article
- Biventricular circulatory support using single-device and dual-device configurations: Initial pump characterization in simulated heart failure model.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
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 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We are developing a universal, advanced ventricular assist device (AVAD) with automatic pressure regulation suitable for both left and right ventricular support. The primary goal of this computational fluid dynamics (CFD) study was to analyze the biventricular performance of the AVAD across its wide range of operating conditions. An AVAD CFD model was created and validated using in vitro hydraulic performance measurements taken over conditions spanning both left ventricular assist device (LVAD) and right ventricular assist device (RVAD) operation. Static pressure taps, placed throughout the pump, were used to validate the CFD results. The CFD model was then used to assess the change in hydraulic performance with varying rotor axial positions and identify potential design improvements. The hydraulic performance was simulated and measured at rotor speeds from 2,300 to 3,600 revolutions/min and flow rates from 2.0 to 8.0 L/min. The CFD-predicted hydraulic pressure rise agreed well with the in vitro measured data, within 6.5% at 2300 rpm and within 3.5% for the higher rotor speeds. The CFD successfully predicted wall static pressures, matching experimental values within 7%. High degree of similarity and circumferential uniformity in the pump's flow fields were observed over the pump operation as an LVAD and an RVAD. A secondary impeller axial clearance reduction resulted in a 10% decrease in peak flow residence time and lower static pressures on the secondary impeller. These lower static pressures suggest a reduction in the upwards rotor forces from the secondary impeller and a desired increase in the pressure sensitivity of the pump. The CFD analyses supported the feasibility of the proposed AVAD's use as an LVAD or an RVAD, over a wide range of operating conditions. The CFD results demonstrated the operability of the pump in providing the desired circumferential flow similarity over the intended range of flow/speed conditions and the intended functionality of the AVAD's automated pressure regulation.
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.