Computational simulations demonstrate significant differences in shear stress gradients between Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids, suggesting that in vitro endothelial cell studies using Newtonian fluids may not accurately reflect in vivo mechanotransduction.
Newtonian assumptions in endothelial cell studies may misrepresent in vivo shear gradients; leaves open whether non-Newtonian models are needed for mechanotransduction research.
Endothelial cell (EC) responsiveness to shear stress is essential for vasoregulation and plays a role in atherogenesis. Although blood is a non-Newtonian fluid, EC flow studies in vitro are typically performed using Newtonian fluids. The goal of the present study was to determine the impact of non-Newtonian behavior on the flow field within a model flow chamber capable of producing flow disturbance and whose dimensions permit Reynolds and Womersley numbers comparable to those present in vivo. We performed two-dimensional computational fluid dynamic simulations of steady and pulsatile laminar flow of Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids over a backward facing step. In the non-Newtonian simulations, the fluid was modeled as a shear-thinning Carreau fluid. Steady flow results demonstrate that for Re in the range 50-400, the flow recirculation zone downstream of the step is 22-63% larger for the Newtonian fluid than for the non-Newtonian fluid, while spatial gradients of shear stress are larger for the non-Newtonian fluid. In pulsatile flow, the temporal gradients of shear stress within the flow recirculation zone are significantly larger for the Newtonian fluid than for the non-Newtonian fluid. These findings raise the possibility that in regions of flow disturbance, EC mechanotransduction pathways stimulated by Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids may be different.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Choi et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: