ReviewCardiovascular engineering and technology2024
Literature Survey for In-Vivo Reynolds and Womersley Numbers of Various Arteries and Implications for Compliant In-Vitro Modelling.
Review in Cardiovascular engineering and technology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Development and evaluation of an automated phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging algorithm for pediatric and adult cerebral blood flow measurement.Neuroradiology · 2026Article
- Phase-specific turbulence index derived from vector flow imaging for identifying intraplaque neovascularization in carotid plaques.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Article
- Quantifying CSF Dynamics disruption in idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus using phase lag between transmantle pressure and volumetric flow rate.Brain multiphysics · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeIn-vitro modelling can be used to investigate haemodynamics of arterial geometry and stent implants. However, in-vitro model fidelity relies on precise matching of in-vivo conditions. In pulsatile flow, velocity distribution and wall shear stress depend on compliance, and the Reynolds and Womersley numbers. However, matching such values may lead to unachievable tolerances in phantom fabrication.
methodsPublished Reynolds and Womersley numbers for 14 major arteries in the human body were determined via a literature search. Preference was given to in-vivo publications but in-vitro and in-silico values were presented when in-vivo values were not found. Subsequently ascending aorta and carotid artery case studies were presented to highlight the limitations dynamic matching would apply to phantom fabrication.
resultsSeven studies reported the in-vivo Reynolds and Womersley numbers for the aorta and two for the carotid artery. However, only one study each reported in-vivo numbers for the remaining ten arteries. No in-vivo data could be found for the femoral, superior mesenteric and renal arteries. Thus, information derived in-vitro and in-silico were provided instead. The ascending aorta and carotid artery models required scaling to 1.5× and 3× life-scale, respectively, to achieve dimensional tolerance restrictions. Modelling the ascending aorta with the comparatively high viscosity water/glycerine solution will lead to high pump power demands. However, all the working fluids considered could be dynamically matched with low pump demand for the carotid model.
conclusionThis paper compiles available human haemodynamic information, and highlights the paucity of information for some arteries. It also provides a method for optimal in-vitro experimental configuration.
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.