ReviewBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Review of Cardiovascular Mock Circulatory Loop Designs and Applications.
Review in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiovascular diseases remain a leading cause of mortality in the United States, driving the need for advanced cardiovascular devices and pharmaceuticals. Mock Circulatory Loops (MCLs) have emerged as essential tools for in vitro testing, replicating pulsatile pressure and flow to simulate various physiological and pathological conditions. While many studies focus on custom MCL designs tailored to specific applications, few have systematically reviewed their use in device testing, and none have assessed their broader utility across diverse biomedical domains. This comprehensive review categorizes MCL designs into three types: mechanical, computational, and hybrid. Applications are classified into four major areas: Cardiovascular Devices Testing, Clinical Training and Education, Hemodynamics and Blood Flow Studies, and Disease Modeling. Most existing MCLs are complex, highly specialized, and difficult to reproduce, highlighting the need for simplified, standardized, and programmable hybrid systems. Improved validation and waveform fidelity-particularly through incorporation of the dicrotic notch and other waveform parameters-are critical for advancing MCL reliability. Furthermore, integration of machine learning and artificial intelligence holds significant promise for enhancing waveform analysis, diagnostics, predictive modeling, and personalized care. In conclusion, the development of MCLs should prioritize standardization, simplification, and broader accessibility to expand their impact across biomedical research and clinical translation.
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.