ArticleJTCVS techniques2026
Patient-specific hemodynamic assessment using experimental and computational approaches in anomalous aortic origin of the coronary artery: Case study.
Article in JTCVS techniques, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To develop and demonstrate the feasibility of a patient-specific framework combining experimental and computational modeling for noninvasive hemodynamic evaluation of anomalous aortic origin of coronary artery (AAOCA) anatomy derived from coronary computed tomography angiography. Methods: A patient with a left AAOCA who experienced aborted sudden cardiac death underwent an unroofing procedure and later required coronary reimplantation after recurrent aborted sudden cardiac death was studied. Patient-specific models were generated at 3 stages: preoperative, postunroofing, and postreimplantation. Experimental assessment used 3-dimensional-printed aortocoronary models integrated with a pulsatile flow loop, whereas computational simulations were performed using computational fluid dynamics. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) and flow velocities were evaluated at rest and under simulated stress and compared with clinical stress FFR obtained during cardiac catheterization. Results: Clinical cardiac catheterization-derived FFR under dobutamine stress was 0.77 postunroofing and 0.99 after reimplantation. Experimental testing demonstrated similar stress FFR of 0.7 in native left AAOCA (with short intramural course), 0.8 after unroofing (compression from the intercoronary pillar), and 0.9 postreimplantation. Computational FFR agreed with both experimental and clinical measurements: lowest values were 0.74 preoperatively, 0.8 post unroofing, and 0.87 post reimplantation. Flow patterns and pressure gradients corresponded with surgical and anatomical observations, showing improved coronary perfusion after reimplantation. Conclusions: This hybrid experimental-computational workflow enables patient-specific assessment of AAOCA hemodynamics across sequential surgical stages. The approach provides accurate evaluation of coronary anatomy, cross-validation of model results, and preliminary mechanistic insight into ischemia, supporting the feasibility of this hybrid approach for patient-specific hemodynamic evaluation and motivating future investigation in larger cohorts.
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.