ArticleEuropean heart journal. Digital health2021
Assessing the methodology used to study the ascending aorta haemodynamics in bicuspid aortic valve.
Article in European heart journal. Digital health, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedErratum.2022
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: Modern imaging techniques provide evermore-detailed anatomical and physiological information for use in computational fluid dynamics to predict the behaviour of physiological phenomena. Computer modelling can help plan suitable interventions. Our group used magnetic resonance imaging and computational fluid dynamics to study the haemodynamic variables in the ascending aorta in patients with bicuspid aortic valve before and after isolated tissue aortic valve replacement. Computer modelling requires turning a physiological model into a mathematical one, solvable by equations that undergo multiple iterations in four dimensions. Creating these models involves several steps with manual inputs, making the process prone to errors and limiting its inter- and intra-operator reproducibility. Despite these challenges, we created computational models for each patient to study ascending aorta blood flow before and after surgery. Methods and results: Magnetic resonance imaging provided the anatomical and velocity data required for the blood flow simulation. Patient-specific in- and outflow boundary conditions were used for the computational fluid dynamics analysis. Haemodynamic variables pertaining to blood flow pattern and derived from the magnetic resonance imaging data were calculated. However, we encountered problems in our multi-step methodology, most notably processing the flow data. This meant that other variables requiring computation with computational fluid dynamics could not be calculated. Conclusion: Creating a model for computational fluid dynamics analysis is as complex as the physiology under scrutiny. We discuss some of the difficulties associated with creating such models, along with suggestions for improvements in order to yield reliable and beneficial results.
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.