These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
5. Validation of numerical simulation methods in aortic arch using 4D Flow MRI. Miyazaki S; Itatani K; Furusawa T; Nishino T; Sugiyama M; Takehara Y; Yasukochi S Heart Vessels; 2017 Aug; 32(8):1032-1044. PubMed ID: 28444501 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Shear-scaling-based approach for irreversible energy loss estimation in stenotic aortic flow - An in vitro study. Gülan U; Binter C; Kozerke S; Holzner M J Biomech; 2017 May; 56():89-96. PubMed ID: 28342532 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The accuracy of magnetic resonance phase velocity measurements in stenotic flow. Siegel JM; Oshinski JN; Pettigrew RI; Ku DN J Biomech; 1996 Dec; 29(12):1665-72. PubMed ID: 8945670 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Aortic valve pressure gradients in patients with aortic valve stenosis: quantification with velocity-encoded cine MR imaging. Eichenberger AC; Jenni R; von Schulthess GK AJR Am J Roentgenol; 1993 May; 160(5):971-7. PubMed ID: 8470612 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. MR measurement and numerical simulation of steady flow in an end-to-side anastomosis model. Steinman DA; Frayne R; Zhang XD; Rutt BK; Ethier CR J Biomech; 1996 Apr; 29(4):537-42. PubMed ID: 8964783 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy and precision of MR velocity mapping in measurement of stenotic cross-sectional area, flow rate, and pressure gradient. Søndergaard L; Ståhlberg F; Thomsen C; Stensgaard A; Lindvig K; Henriksen O J Magn Reson Imaging; 1993; 3(2):433-7. PubMed ID: 8448407 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Mapping mean and fluctuating velocities by Bayesian multipoint MR velocity encoding-validation against 3D particle tracking velocimetry. Knobloch V; Binter C; Gülan U; Sigfridsson A; Holzner M; Lüthi B; Kozerke S Magn Reson Med; 2014 Apr; 71(4):1405-15. PubMed ID: 23670993 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Quantification of intravoxel velocity standard deviation and turbulence intensity by generalizing phase-contrast MRI. Dyverfeldt P; Sigfridsson A; Kvitting JP; Ebbers T Magn Reson Med; 2006 Oct; 56(4):850-8. PubMed ID: 16958074 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Comparison of velocity-encoded MR imaging and fluid dynamic modeling of steady and disturbed flow. Sun Y; Hearshen DO; Rankin GW; Haggar AM J Magn Reson Imaging; 1992; 2(4):443-52. PubMed ID: 1633398 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Velocity mapping of the aortic flow at 9.4 T in healthy mice and mice with induced heart failure using time-resolved three-dimensional phase-contrast MRI (4D PC MRI). Bovenkamp PR; Brix T; Lindemann F; Holtmeier R; Abdurrachim D; Kuhlmann MT; Strijkers GJ; Stypmann J; Hinrichs KH; Hoerr V MAGMA; 2015 Aug; 28(4):315-27. PubMed ID: 25381179 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Accuracy of MR phase contrast velocity measurements for unsteady flow. Frayne R; Steinman DA; Ethier CR; Rutt BK J Magn Reson Imaging; 1995; 5(4):428-31. PubMed ID: 7549205 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Mid-term results of freestyle aortic stentless bioprosthetic valve: clinical impact of quantitative analysis of in-vivo three-dimensional flow velocity profile by magnetic resonance imaging. Matsue H; Sawa Y; Matsumiya G; Matsuda H; Hamada S J Heart Valve Dis; 2005 Sep; 14(5):630-6. PubMed ID: 16245502 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Analysis of Transitional and Turbulent Flow Through the FDA Benchmark Nozzle Model Using Laser Doppler Velocimetry. Taylor JO; Good BC; Paterno AV; Hariharan P; Deutsch S; Malinauskas RA; Manning KB Cardiovasc Eng Technol; 2016 Sep; 7(3):191-209. PubMed ID: 27350137 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Laser Doppler velocimetry (LDV) and 3D phase-contrast magnetic resonance angiography (PC-MRA) velocity measurements: validation in an anatomically accurate cerebral artery aneurysm model with steady flow. Hollnagel DI; Summers PE; Kollias SS; Poulikakos D J Magn Reson Imaging; 2007 Dec; 26(6):1493-505. PubMed ID: 17968887 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. In-vivo assessment of the morphology and hemodynamic functions of the BioValsalva™ composite valve-conduit graft using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging and computational modelling technology. Kidher E; Cheng Z; Jarral OA; O'Regan DP; Xu XY; Athanasiou T J Cardiothorac Surg; 2014 Dec; 9():193. PubMed ID: 25488105 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Digital particle image velocimetry (DPIV) measurements of the velocity profiles through bileaflet mechanical valves: in vitro steady. Shandas R; Kwon J Biomed Sci Instrum; 1996; 32():161-7. PubMed ID: 8672664 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]