ArticleScientific reports2024
In vitro investigation of the blood flow downstream of a 3D-printed aortic valve.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Simultaneous 3D Quantification of Fluid-Structure Interaction in a Patient-Averaged Left Ventricle: A Lagrangian Experimental Framework.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Optimisation of Bioinspired Fibre Architectures for 3D-Printed Polymer Heart Valves via Melt Electrowriting (MEW) Using FE Modelling and Design of Experiments (FE-DOE).Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Computational Modeling Meets 3D Bioprinting: Emerging Synergies in Cardiovascular Disease Modeling.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Review
- Integrated multidisciplinary approach to aneurysm hemodynamic analysis: numerical simulation,Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Review
- Comparison of Hemodynamic Performance, Three-Dimensional Flow Fields, and Turbulence Levels for Three Different Heart Valves at Three Different Hemodynamic Conditions.Annals of biomedical engineering · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The hemodynamics in the aorta as well as the durability of aortic valve prostheses vary greatly between different types of devices. Although placement and sizing of surgical aortic valve prostheses are excellent, the valve geometry of common devices cannot be customized to fit the patient's anatomy perfectly. Similarly, transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) devices are not customizable and may be orientated unfavorably during implantation. Imperfect fit of an aortic valve prosthesis may result in suboptimal performance and in some cases the need for additional surgery. Leveraging the advent of precision, multi-material 3D-printing, a bioinspired silicone aortic valve was developed. The manufacturing technique makes it fully customizable and significantly cheaper to develop and produce than common prostheses. In this study, we assess the hemodynamic performance of such a 3D-printed aortic valve and compare it to two TAVI devices as well as to a severely stenosed valve. We investigate the blood flow distal to the valve in an anatomically accurate, compliant aorta model via three-dimensional particle tracking velocimetry measurements. Our results demonstrate that the 3D-printed aortic valve induces flow patterns and topology compatible with the TAVI valves and showing similarity to healthy aortic blood flow. Compared to the stenosis, the 3D-printed aortic valve reduces turbulent kinetic energy levels and irreversible energy losses by over 75%, reaching values compatible with healthy subjects and conventional TAVIs. Our study substantiates that the 3D-printed heart valve displays a hemodynamic performance similar to established devices and underscores its potential for driving innovation towards patient specific valve prostheses.
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.