ArticleMedical & biological engineering & computing2026
Hemodynamic performance and blood damage of the Intra-aortic pumps: A CFD-Based investigation.
Article in Medical & biological engineering & computing, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Three intra-aortic blood pumps were evaluated and compared using CFD simulations. The aim of this study is to evaluate the hemodynamic performance and calculate the hemolytic potential of the pumps. The flow fields generated by the pumps were simulated using CFD with a wall-modeled large eddy simulation (WMLES) approach. The simulations produced pressure-flow curves, hydraulic efficiency, shear stress distributions, and hemolysis predictions. A grid study was conducted using the Grid Convergence Index (GCI) method, and a new dimensionless parameter, the Hemolytic Number (HN), was introduced as a standardized metric to compare hemolysis and universal pump performance. The impeller-driven pump had the highest-pressure head (~ 800 Pa at 4 L/min) and the best hydraulic efficiency (~ 6% at 14 L/min), outperforming both the single (maximum 2.7%) and triplet (maximum 2.2%) pumps. The NIH values were also lowest for the impeller pump (NIH ≈ 0.0035 g/100L), indicating high hemocompatibility. Both the single and triplet pumps showed regions of recirculation, particularly at lower flow rates. A smaller HN indicates better hemocompatibility; for the impeller-driven pump, HN remains below 1 across the investigated flow rates. Overall, the impeller-driven pump outperformed the other designs in terms of both hemodynamic and hemolytic measurements. The findings provide valuable insights for the future development of intra-aortic pumps and the personalized selection of devices for individual patients.
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.