271 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 12918911)
21. Peak velocity measurements in tortuous arteries with phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging: the effect of multidirectional velocity encoding.
Schubert T; Bieri O; Pansini M; Stippich C; Santini F
Invest Radiol; 2014 Apr; 49(4):189-94. PubMed ID: 24300842
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
22. Development of a System for Measuring Wall Shear Stress in Blood Vessels using Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Computational Fluid Dynamics.
Yoshida K; Nagao T; Okada K; Miyazaki S; Yang X; Yamazaki Y; Murase K
Igaku Butsuri; 2008; 27(3):136-49. PubMed ID: 18367824
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. On the relative importance of rheology for image-based CFD models of the carotid bifurcation.
Lee SW; Steinman DA
J Biomech Eng; 2007 Apr; 129(2):273-8. PubMed ID: 17408332
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. Computational fluid dynamics simulations of blood flow regularized by 3D phase contrast MRI.
Rispoli VC; Nielsen JF; Nayak KS; Carvalho JL
Biomed Eng Online; 2015 Nov; 14():110. PubMed ID: 26611470
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. Computational simulations and experimental studies of 3D phase-contrast imaging of fluid flow in carotid bifurcation geometries.
Marshall I
J Magn Reson Imaging; 2010 Apr; 31(4):928-34. PubMed ID: 20373438
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Minimizing the blood velocity differences between phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging and computational fluid dynamics simulation in cerebral arteries and aneurysms.
Mohd Adib MAH; Ii S; Watanabe Y; Wada S
Med Biol Eng Comput; 2017 Sep; 55(9):1605-1619. PubMed ID: 28161877
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. Assessment of turbulent flow effects on the vessel wall using four-dimensional flow MRI.
Ziegler M; Lantz J; Ebbers T; Dyverfeldt P
Magn Reson Med; 2017 Jun; 77(6):2310-2319. PubMed ID: 27350049
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
28. Accuracy and Precision of a Plane Wave Vector Flow Imaging Method in the Healthy Carotid Artery.
Jensen J; Hoyos CAV; Traberg MS; Olesen JB; Tomov BG; Moshavegh R; Holbek S; Stuart MB; Ewertsen C; Hansen KL; Thomsen C; Nielsen MB; Jensen JA
Ultrasound Med Biol; 2018 Aug; 44(8):1727-1741. PubMed ID: 29735315
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. A comparison of estimation methods for computational fluid dynamics outflow boundary conditions using patient-specific carotid artery.
Lee CJ; Uemiya N; Ishihara S; Zhang Y; Qian Y
Proc Inst Mech Eng H; 2013 Jun; 227(6):663-71. PubMed ID: 23636745
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
30. Accuracy and reproducibility of CFD predicted wall shear stress using 3D ultrasound images.
Augst AD; Barratt DC; Hughes AD; Glor FP; McG Thom SA; Xu XY
J Biomech Eng; 2003 Apr; 125(2):218-22. PubMed ID: 12751283
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
31. Characterization of shear stress on the wall of the carotid artery using magnetic resonance imaging and computational fluid dynamics.
Yim P; Demarco K; Castro MA; Cebral J
Stud Health Technol Inform; 2005; 113():412-42. PubMed ID: 15923751
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Phase-contrast MRI with hybrid one and two-sided flow-encoding and velocity spectrum separation.
Wang D; Shao J; Ennis DB; Hu P
Magn Reson Med; 2017 Jul; 78(1):182-192. PubMed ID: 27504987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. Feasibility of patient specific aortic blood flow CFD simulation.
Svensson J; Gårdhagen R; Heiberg E; Ebbers T; Loyd D; Länne T; Karlsson M
Med Image Comput Comput Assist Interv; 2006; 9(Pt 1):257-63. PubMed ID: 17354898
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
34. 4D model of hemodynamics in the abdominal aorta.
Zbicinski I; Veshkina N; Stefańczyk L
Biomed Mater Eng; 2015; 26 Suppl 1():S257-64. PubMed ID: 26406010
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
35. The influence of inflow boundary conditions on intra left ventricle flow predictions.
Long Q; Merrifield R; Yang GZ; Kilner PJ; Firmin DN; Xu XY
J Biomech Eng; 2003 Dec; 125(6):922-7. PubMed ID: 14986421
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. Four-Dimensional Flow Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Assessment of Velocity Magnitudes and Flow Patterns in The Human Carotid Artery Bifurcation: Comparison with Computational Fluid Dynamics.
Ngo MT; Kim CI; Jung J; Chung GH; Lee DH; Kwak HS
Diagnostics (Basel); 2019 Dec; 9(4):. PubMed ID: 31847224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
37. Comparison of intracranial aneurysm flow quantification techniques: standard PIV vs stereoscopic PIV vs tomographic PIV vs phase-contrast MRI vs CFD.
Roloff C; Stucht D; Beuing O; Berg P
J Neurointerv Surg; 2019 Mar; 11(3):275-282. PubMed ID: 30061369
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
38. Two-dimensional blood velocity estimation with ultrasound: speckle tracking versus crossed-beam vector Doppler based on flow simulations in a carotid bifurcation model.
Swillens A; Segers P; Torp H; Løvstakken L
IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control; 2010; 57(2):327-39. PubMed ID: 20178899
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Combined MRI and CFD analysis of fully developed steady and pulsatile laminar flow through a bend.
Weston SJ; Wood NB; Tabor G; Gosman AD; Firmin DN
J Magn Reson Imaging; 1998; 8(5):1158-71. PubMed ID: 9786156
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
40. Cerebral blood flow in a healthy Circle of Willis and two intracranial aneurysms: computational fluid dynamics versus four-dimensional phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging.
Berg P; Stucht D; Janiga G; Beuing O; Speck O; Thévenin D
J Biomech Eng; 2014 Apr; 136(4):. PubMed ID: 24292415
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Previous] [Next] [New Search]
