ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Modeling Techniques and Boundary Conditions in Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Analysis: Latest Developments in Simulation and Integration of Machine Learning and Data-Driven Approaches.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. 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.
- Forecasting Patient-Specific Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm Geometry with Mixed-Effects Models.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- 2D Ultrasound Elasticity Imaging of Abdominal Aortic Aneurysms Using Deep Neural Networks.IEEE transactions on computational imaging · 2026Article
- AI-driven predictive modeling for mycotic aneurysm rupture risk in immunocompromised patients.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
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
Abstract
Research on abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAAs) primarily focuses on developing a clear understanding of the initiation, progression, and treatment of AAA through improved model accuracy. High-fidelity hemodynamic and biomechanical predictions are essential for clinicians to optimize preoperative planning and minimize therapeutic risks. Computational fluid dynamics (CFDs), finite element analysis (FEA), and fluid-structure interaction (FSI) are widely used to simulate AAA hemodynamics and biomechanics. However, the accuracy of these simulations depends on the utilization of realistic and sophisticated boundary conditions (BCs), which are essential for properly integrating the AAA with the rest of the cardiovascular system. Recent advances in machine learning (ML) techniques have introduced faster, data-driven surrogates for AAA modeling. These approaches can accelerate segmentation, predict hemodynamics and biomechanics, and assess disease progression. However, their reliability depends on high-quality training data derived from CFDs and FEA simulations, where BC modeling plays a crucial role. Accurate BCs can enhance ML predictions, increasing the clinical applicability. This paper reviews existing BC models, discussing their limitations and technical challenges. Additionally, recent advancements in ML and data-driven techniques are explored, discussing their current states, future directions, common algorithms, and limitations.
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.