ArticleFrontiers in physiology2022
A Multi-Domain Simulation Study of a Pulsatile-Flow Pump Device for Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Compliance modulation of a soft robotic atrioventricular model of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Pre-Clinical Models of Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: Advancing Knowledge for Device Based Therapies.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Review
- HeartMate 3 for Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction: In Vitro Hemodynamic Evaluation and Anatomical Fitting.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2024Article
- Impact of Impeller Speed Adjustment Interval on Hemolysis Performance of an Intravascular Micro-Axial Blood Pump.Micromachines · 2024Article
- Acausal Modelling of Advanced-Stage Heart Failure and the Istanbul Heart Ventricular Assist Device Support with Patient Data.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2023Article
- A numerical study of a left ventricular expander for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Framework for patient-specific simulation of hemodynamics in heart failure with counterpulsation support.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) devices are currently under development to improve the physiology and hemodynamics of patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Most of these devices, however, are designed to provide continuous-flow support. While it has been shown that pulsatile support may overcome some of the complications hindering the clinical translation of these devices for other heart failure phenotypes, the effects that it may have on the HFpEF physiology are still unknown. Here, we present a multi-domain simulation study of a pulsatile pump device with left atrial cannulation for HFpEF that aims to alleviate left atrial pressure, commonly elevated in HFpEF. We leverage lumped-parameter modeling to optimize the design of the pulsatile pump, computational fluid dynamic simulations to characterize hydraulic and hemolytic performance, and finite element modeling on the Living Heart Model to evaluate effects on arterial, left atrial, and left ventricular hemodynamics and biomechanics. The findings reported in this study suggest that pulsatile-flow support can successfully reduce pressures and associated wall stresses in the left heart, while yielding more physiologic arterial hemodynamics compared to continuous-flow support. This work therefore supports further development and evaluation of pulsatile support MCS devices for HFpEF.
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.