ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
MRI-Based Pressure Gradient Mapping in Patient-Specific Models of Coarctation of the Aorta.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 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
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Purpose: Accurate assessment of the pressure gradient ( Methods: Patient-specific compliant aortic phantoms were created from clinical MRI data of two patients with CoA. Additional geometries were synthetically generated by increasing stenosis severity. Phantoms were studied in an MRI-compatible flow loop under physiologically realistic flow and pressure conditions. Pressure gradients were estimated using conventional 4D-Flow MRI, 4D-FlowP, and fluid-structure interaction (FSI) simulations. Results were compared against ground-truth catheter-based measurements across multiple flow rates and stenosis severities. Results: Conventional 4D-Flow consistently underestimated Conclusion: 4D-FlowP enables a more accurate MRI-based pressure gradient mapping in CoA than conventional 4D-Flow, when compared to ground truth catheter measurements. These findings support further
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.