ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2022
Validation and Verification of High-Fidelity Simulations of Thoracic Stent-Graft Implantation.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Mechanical Performance of Thoracic Aortic Stent-Grafts: An In Vitro and In Silico Study.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Bioprinted Constructs in the Regulatory Landscape: Current State and Future Perspectives.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2026Review
- Abdominal Stent Graft Numerical Models to Virtually Simulate Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Scoping Review.EJVES vascular forum · 2026Review
- Uncertainty quantification for patient-specific domain in virtual aortic procedures: application to thoracic endovascular aortic repair.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- Bare Metal Stenting for Residual Arch Dissections: A Computational Analysis.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2025Article
- Assessing calcification effects in TEVAR procedures: a computational analysis.Biomechanics and modeling in mechanobiology · 2025Article
- Computational Simulation of Respiration-Induced Deformation of Renal Arteries After EVAR.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2025Article
- Discussing on the Aortic Coverage in Type B Aortic Dissection Treatment: A Comprehensive Scoping Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Computational Comparison of the Mechanical Behavior of Aortic Stent-Grafts Derived from Auxetic Unit Cells.Cardiovascular engineering and technology · 2024Article
- Utilizing numerical simulations to prevent stent graft kinking during thoracic endovascular aortic repair.Journal of vascular surgery cases and innovative techniques · 2023Article
- Patient-Specific Numerical Simulations of Endovascular Procedures in Complex Aortic Pathologies: Review and Clinical Perspectives.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Fabrication of Compliant and Transparent Hollow Cerebral Vascular Phantoms for In Vitro Studies Using 3D Printing and Spin-Dip Coating.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Thoracic Endovascular Aortic Repair (TEVAR) is the preferred treatment option for thoracic aortic pathologies and consists of inserting a self-expandable stent-graft into the pathological region to restore the lumen. Computational models play a significant role in procedural planning and must be reliable. For this reason, in this work, high-fidelity Finite Element (FE) simulations are developed to model thoracic stent-grafts. Experimental crimp/release tests are performed to calibrate stent-grafts material parameters. Stent pre-stress is included in the stent-graft model. A new methodology for replicating device insertion and deployment with explicit FE simulations is proposed. To validate this simulation, the stent-graft is experimentally released into a 3D rigid aortic phantom with physiological anatomy and inspected in a computed tomography (CT) scan at different time points during deployment with an ad-hoc set-up. A verification analysis of the adopted modeling features compared to the literature is performed. With the proposed methodology the error with respect to the CT is on average 0.92 ± 0.64%, while it is higher when literature models are adopted (on average 4.77 ± 1.83%). The presented FE tool is versatile and customizable for different commercial devices and applicable to patient-specific analyses.
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.