ReviewSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024
A Synergistic Overview between Microfluidics and Numerical Research for Vascular Flow and Pathological Investigations.
Review in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- In Silico Evaluation of Mechanobiological Parameters Under Variable Flow in Three-Dimensional Microfluidic Platforms Supporting Future Cell Migration Studies.Biomedicines · 2026Article
- Microfluidic Platforms for Modeling Cancer-Associated Thrombosis: Current Status and Future Directions.Research and practice in thrombosis and haemostasis · 2026Review
- Device-Oriented CFD Comparison of Rectangular and Circular Microchannels with Single and Double Asymmetric Stenoses Under Identical Operating Conditions.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The Latest Advances in Microfluidic DLD Cell Sorting Technology: The Optimization of Channel Design.Biosensors · 2025Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vascular diseases are widespread, and sometimes such life-threatening medical disorders cause abnormal blood flow, blood particle damage, changes to flow dynamics, restricted blood flow, and other adverse effects. The study of vascular flow is crucial in clinical practice because it can shed light on the causes of stenosis, aneurysm, blood cancer, and many other such diseases, and guide the development of novel treatments and interventions. Microfluidics and computational fluid dynamics (CFDs) are two of the most promising new tools for investigating these phenomena. When compared to conventional experimental methods, microfluidics offers many benefits, including lower costs, smaller sample quantities, and increased control over fluid flow and parameters. In this paper, we address the strengths and weaknesses of computational and experimental approaches utilizing microfluidic devices to investigate the rheological properties of blood, the forces of action causing diseases related to cardiology, provide an overview of the models and methodologies of experiments, and the fabrication of devices utilized in these types of research, and portray the results achieved and their applications. We also discuss how these results can inform clinical practice and where future research should go. Overall, it provides insights into why a combination of both CFDs, and experimental methods can give even more detailed information on disease mechanisms recreated on a microfluidic platform, replicating the original biological system and aiding in developing the device or chip itself.
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.