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.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

113 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 32108906)

  • 1. Investigation of phase-contrast magnetic resonance imaging underestimation of turbulent flow through the aortic valve phantom: experimental and computational study using lattice Boltzmann method.
    Fučík R; Galabov R; Pauš P; Eichler P; Klinkovský J; Straka R; Tintěra J; Chabiniok R
    MAGMA; 2020 Oct; 33(5):649-662. PubMed ID: 32108906
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Validation of pressure drop assessment using 4D flow MRI-based turbulence production in various shapes of aortic stenoses.
    Ha H; Kvitting JP; Dyverfeldt P; Ebbers T
    Magn Reson Med; 2019 Feb; 81(2):893-906. PubMed ID: 30252155
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. On the accuracy of viscous and turbulent loss quantification in stenotic aortic flow using phase-contrast MRI.
    Binter C; Gülan U; Holzner M; Kozerke S
    Magn Reson Med; 2016 Jul; 76(1):191-6. PubMed ID: 26258402
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. 4D Flow MRI quantification of blood flow patterns, turbulence and pressure drop in normal and stenotic prosthetic heart valves.
    Ha H; Kvitting JP; Dyverfeldt P; Ebbers T
    Magn Reson Imaging; 2019 Jan; 55():118-127. PubMed ID: 30266627
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Real-time phase contrast magnetic resonance imaging for assessment of haemodynamics: from phantom to patients.
    Traber J; Wurche L; Dieringer MA; Utz W; von Knobelsdorff-Brenkenhoff F; Greiser A; Jin N; Schulz-Menger J
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Apr; 26(4):986-96. PubMed ID: 26188655
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Turbulent Kinetic Energy Measurement Using Phase Contrast MRI for Estimating the Post-Stenotic Pressure Drop: In Vitro Validation and Clinical Application.
    Ha H; Kim GB; Kweon J; Huh HK; Lee SJ; Koo HJ; Kang JW; Lim TH; Kim DH; Kim YH; Kim N; Yang DH
    PLoS One; 2016; 11(3):e0151540. PubMed ID: 26978529
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. The effect of varying degrees of stenosis on the characteristics of turbulent pulsatile flow through heart valves.
    Bluestein D; Einav S
    J Biomech; 1995 Aug; 28(8):915-24. PubMed ID: 7673259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. 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]  

  • 9. In vitro assessment of flow patterns and turbulence intensity in prosthetic heart valves using generalized phase-contrast MRI.
    Kvitting JP; Dyverfeldt P; Sigfridsson A; Franzén S; Wigström L; Bolger AF; Ebbers T
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2010 May; 31(5):1075-80. PubMed ID: 20432341
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. 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]  

  • 11. MRI phase contrast velocity and flow errors in turbulent stenotic jets.
    O'Brien KR; Cowan BR; Jain M; Stewart RA; Kerr AJ; Young AA
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Jul; 28(1):210-8. PubMed ID: 18581344
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Numerical and experimental study of a novel phase contrast magnetic resonance (PC-MR) imaging technique: sparse interleaved referencing PC-MR imaging.
    Li L; Doyle M; Rayarao G; Biederman RW; Anayiotos A
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2008 Apr; 27(4):898-907. PubMed ID: 18383251
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Clinical assessment of aortic valve stenosis: Comparison between 4D flow MRI and transthoracic echocardiography.
    Adriaans BP; Westenberg JJM; van Cauteren YJM; Gerretsen S; Elbaz MSM; Bekkers SCAM; Veenstra LF; Crijns HJGM; Wildberger JE; Schalla S
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2020 Feb; 51(2):472-480. PubMed ID: 31257647
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Dynamically scaled phantom phase contrast MRI compared to true-scale computational modeling of coronary artery flow.
    Beier S; Ormiston JA; Webster MW; Cater JE; Norris SE; Medrano-Gracia P; Young AA; Cowan BR
    J Magn Reson Imaging; 2016 Oct; 44(4):983-92. PubMed ID: 27042817
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Toward accurate and fast velocity quantification with 3D ultrashort TE phase-contrast imaging.
    Degenhardt K; Schmidt S; Aigner CS; Kratzer FJ; Seiter DP; Mueller M; Kolbitsch C; Nagel AM; Wieben O; Schaeffter T; Schulz-Menger J; Schmitter S
    Magn Reson Med; 2024 May; 91(5):1994-2009. PubMed ID: 38174601
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Quantification of turbulence and velocity in stenotic flow using spiral three-dimensional phase-contrast MRI.
    Petersson S; Dyverfeldt P; Sigfridsson A; Lantz J; Carlhäll CJ; Ebbers T
    Magn Reson Med; 2016 Mar; 75(3):1249-55. PubMed ID: 25846511
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Factors affecting the accuracy of pressure measurements in vascular stenoses from phase-contrast MRI.
    Nasiraei-Moghaddam A; Behrens G; Fatouraee N; Agarwal R; Choi ET; Amini AA
    Magn Reson Med; 2004 Aug; 52(2):300-9. PubMed ID: 15282812
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Four-dimensional flow MRI for evaluation of post-stenotic turbulent flow in a phantom: comparison with flowmeter and computational fluid dynamics.
    Kweon J; Yang DH; Kim GB; Kim N; Paek M; Stalder AF; Greiser A; Kim YH
    Eur Radiol; 2016 Oct; 26(10):3588-97. PubMed ID: 26747263
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Comparing velocity and fluid shear stress in a stenotic phantom with steady flow: phase-contrast MRI, particle image velocimetry and computational fluid dynamics.
    Khodarahmi I
    MAGMA; 2015 Aug; 28(4):385-93. PubMed ID: 25502616
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 6.