ArticleCardiovascular engineering and technology2026
Hemodynamic Analysis of Non-uniformly Calcified Aortic Valve Using a Partitioned Fluid-Structure Interaction Framework.
Article in Cardiovascular engineering and technology, 2026. 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.
- Improvement of occipital neuralgia by pulsed radiofrequency of the greater occipital nerve combined with local magnesium sulfate injection: a randomized controlled study.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Article
- Influence of Coronary Flow and Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Velocity on LDL Accumulation and Calcification in Aortic Valve Leaflets.Biomechanics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeCalcific Aortic Valve Disease (CAVD) is a common cause for aortic stenosis characterized by the progressive calcification and stiffening of the aortic valve, often leading to significant hemodynamic changes and impaired cardiac function. Several Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) simulations have been conducted in the literature to provide more detailed analysis of CAVD, but are mainly reliant on uniform calcification. Also, outcomes from current clinical diagnostic techniques do not account for the effect of non-uniform calcification. The purpose of this study is to extend previous CFD simulations to non-uniformly calcified aortic valves and to evaluate the accuracy of clinical diagnostic methods under these conditions.
methodsHigh-fidelity simulations of non-uniformly calcified aortic valves are performed by coupling fluid and solid solvers using a partitioned fluid-structure interaction (FSI) method for a patient-specific valve model extracted from computed tomography (CT) images. Non-uniform calcification is modelled by varying the elasticity along the leaflet, with several levels of calcification ranging from mild to severe.
resultsNon-uniform calcification alters flow physics, leading in up to 35-50% increase in maximum jet velocity and up to 150-170% rise in TPG compared to the normal valve, significant vortex shedding, extended flow separation regions, and intensified wall shear stress (WSS) fluctuations, especially on the ventricular side of the leaflet. The results indicate that the severity of calcification cannot be accurately predicted by several clinical diagnostic methods, with only effective orifice area (EOA) and maximum opening ratio (MOR) emerging as the reliable predictors.
conclusionsThe progression of non-uniform calcification on the aortic valve leaflets significantly impacts both hemodynamics and leaflet mechanics, with clear alterations in flow patterns and biomechanical responses as calcification severity increases. These findings highlight the need for more accurate diagnostic techniques and may drive the development of improved clinical strategies for the management and treatment of CAVD.
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.