ArticleJournal of cardiovascular translational research2025
4D-Flow MRI and Vector Ultrasound in the In-Vitro Evaluation of Surgical Aortic Heart Valves - a Pilot Study.
Article in Journal of cardiovascular translational research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Analysis of aortic valve prostheses using advanced cardiovascular imaging-a patient-specific reversed translational approach.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- A fully coupled fluid-structure interaction model for patient-specific analysis of bioprosthetic aortic valve haemodynamics.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe aim of this study was the initial investigation of 4D-Flow MRI and Vector Ultrasound as novel imaging techniques in the in-vitro analysis of hemodynamics in anatomical models. Specifically, by looking at the hemodynamic performance of state-of-the-art surgical heart valves in a 3D-printed aortic arch.
methodsThe mock circulatory loop simulated physiological, pulsatile flow. Two mechanical and three biological aortic valves prostheses were compared in a 3D-printed aortic arch. 4D magnetic resonance imaging and vector flow Doppler ultrasound served as imaging methods. Hemodynamic parameters such as wall shear stress, flow velocities and pressure gradients were analyzed.
resultsThe flow analysis revealed characteristic flow-patterns in the 3D-printed aortic arch. The blood-flow in the arch presented complex patterns, including the formation of helixes and vortices. Higher proximal peak velocities and lower flow volumes were found for biological valves.
conclusionThe mock circulatory loop in combination with modern radiological imaging provides a sufficient basis for the hemodynamic comparison of aortic valves.
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.