Key result
Computational fluid dynamics simulations accurately predicted intra-luminal pressures in type B aortic dissection models with large tears, demonstrating average relative errors of less than 10% compared to in vitro measurements.
Why the study?
Does a computational fluid dynamic (CFD) tool accurately predict intra-luminal pressures compared to in vitro phantom measurements in type B aortic dissection scenarios?
Population
4 idealized dissected physical models of chronic type B aortic dissection with varying tear sizes and…
Comparison
Computational fluid dynamic simulations using a… vs In vitro experimental measurements on compliant…
Design
Preclinical
Authors
Loading...
May refine hemodynamic modeling in type B dissection; leaves open clinical adoption pending human validation.
Does a computational fluid dynamic (CFD) tool accurately predict intra-luminal pressures compared to in vitro phantom measurements in type B aortic dissection scenarios?
CFD simulations can accurately predict intra-luminal pressures in chronic type B aortic dissections with large tears, providing a potential tool for hemodynamic characterization.
Soudah et al. (2013) studied Type B aortic dissection. Computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations vs. In vitro phantom measurements was evaluated on Intra-luminal pressure relative error. Computational fluid dynamics simulations accurately predicted intra-luminal pressures in type B aortic dissection models with large tears, demonstrating average relative errors of less than 10% compared to in vitro measurements.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: