ArticleScientific reports2024
Hemodynamic comparisons of different shunt positions and geometrical model simplification strategies in the simulation of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS) is a widely used surgery for portal hypertensive patients, whose potential postoperative complications are closely related to the hemodynamic condition of the portal venous system. The selection of shunt position in the surgery may affect the postoperative hemodynamics; however, it is difficult for clinical studies to investigate the influence. Therefore, this study aims to employ the computational model simulating TIPS to compare the hemodynamic differences resulting from different shunt positions, and also to investigate the influences of different geometrical model simplification strategies used in the TIPS simulation. For this purpose, the clinical data of two representative patients were retrospectively collected, based on which, the computational hemodynamic models of the portal venous systems after TIPS were constructed, incorporating three typical shunt positions (i.e. shunt at the left/main/right portal vein) and three types of geometrical model simplification. Results showed that among the models with different shunt positions, the area-averaged flow velocity magnitudes in the shunts were very similar, while the model with shunt at the main portal vein showed the lowest postoperative portal pressure and the smallest area of high wall shear stress near the portal venous bifurcation. Among the models using different geometrical model simplification strategies, the simulated blood pressures at the main portal veins were very similar, but showed marked differences near the shunt inlets. Moreover, the area-averaged flow velocity magnitudes in the shunts were almost the same, while the velocity distributions differed a lot, leading to the different spatial distributions of wall shear stress near the portal venous bifurcations and shunt walls. These results on one hand suggested that placing the shunt at the main portal vein is more beneficial for the patient; on the other hand, they proved the feasibility of utilizing simplified model to save computational cost without losing the accuracy when the pressure at the main portal vein is mainly focused on. These findings would assist clinical decision-making and promote more accurate and efficient TIPS simulations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.