Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 29 references

Modeling heart flow dynamics using numerical simulations to identify the vortex ring: a practical guide

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that moving ventricular walls, a hyperbolic-tangent inlet, and a mass-flow outlet reproduce the left ventricle's vortex ring to under 2 percent kinetic-energy error.

desk verdict Useful practical guide for LV vortex-ring CFD, but the evidence for 'capturing the vortex ring' is mostly qualitative and the wall-scaling equations have a fixable typo. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16661 v1 pith:KFGRIIMN submitted 2024-11-25 physics.flu-dyn

Eneko Lazpita , Andrea Mares , Pedro Quintero , Jesús Garicano-Mena , Soledad Le Clainche This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.flu-dyn
keywords leftventriclevortexringcomputationalfluiddynamicscardiachemodynamicsmovingwallboundaryconditioninletvelocityprofilemeshconvergencetotalkineticenergy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is a practical guide to configuring numerical simulations of blood flow in a model left ventricle so that the vortex ring—the doughnut-shaped swirl formed as blood enters through the mitral valve—is captured correctly. The authors claim that a small set of choices does the job: drive the ventricle wall by integrating a physiological flow-rate curve, feed the chamber through an inlet tube at least two diameters long with a hyperbolic tangent velocity profile, and let blood leave through a mass-flow outlet rather than a pressure outlet. With these choices and a wall-refined mesh, they report that total kinetic energy converges with relative error below 2 percent and that the ring's formation, tilt, and break-up match an independent solver's results. If the recipe transfers, it gives researchers a low-cost, reproducible starting point for vortex-focused cardiac flow studies.

What carries the argument

The machinery that carries the claim is the moving-wall boundary condition: the ventricular wall is a semi-ellipsoid whose axes are recomputed from the volume curve using Eqs. (4)–(5) with $k=4$, then morphed incrementally between end-systolic and end-diastolic volumes so the chamber volume tracks the integrated flow-rate data. Around that, the hyperbolic tangent inlet profile, Eq. (8), is the second load-bearing piece: it sets velocity to zero at the wall and approaches the plug value in the core, avoiding the wall discontinuity of a plug profile and the excess jet penetration of a parabolic profile. The vortex ring, visualized by Q-criterion isosurfaces, is the diagnostic object that the recipe is designed to preserve.

What would settle it

Run the same boundary-condition recipe in a geometry whose wall motion is taken from measured patient imaging (4D echocardiography or tagged MRI) instead of the uniform $k=4$ scaling; if the vortex ring's formation, tilt direction, or dissipation timing changes measurably, the uniform-scaling premise is the failing part.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's contribution is a boundary-condition recipe for left-ventricle simulations focused on the vortex ring rather than on turbulence-resolving fidelity. The authors report that static walls fail to produce the ring or apical recirculation, so the wall must move; they generate that motion by integrating a physiological flow-rate curve and uniformly rescaling a semi-ellipsoidal chamber while holding the $k=4$ axis ratio fixed. For inflow, they find that a velocity or mass-flow inlet with a hyperbolic tangent spatial profile (plug for patient-specific geometries) and an inlet tube at least two diameters long is the most efficient way to get a clean jet; a parabolic profile perturbs the jet and slows the ring's tilt and decay. For outflow, a mass-flow outlet that is set to zero in diastole avoids the noise of switching a pressure outlet to a wall. With these choices and five prism layers near the wall, both Star-CCM+ and Ansys Fluent produce nearly identical total kinetic energy traces, converging to relative errors under 2 percent on medium meshes, and both reproduce the documented sequence of ring formation, clockwise tilt, instability growth, and dissipation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that a real ventricle can be represented as a semi-ellipsoid whose wall expands and contracts uniformly with its $4{:}1$ axis ratio fixed at every instant; if real wall kinematics—twist, regional contraction, valve motion—matter for the vortex ring, this recipe may not transfer to patient-specific models.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A laminar solver is enough for early-diastole vortex ring studies, so researchers can skip turbulence models and save computational cost.
  • Inlet development length matters: tubes shorter than two diameters will distort the profile before it reaches the chamber, so the two-diameter rule is a practical lower bound.
  • Hyperbolic tangent inlet profiles converge on coarser meshes than plug profiles, lowering mesh requirements while preserving vortex dynamics.
  • The validated agreement between two independent solver implementations means the setup is not tied to a single code and the boundary-condition logic transfers.
  • A mass-flow outlet is preferred over switching between a pressure outlet and a wall because it avoids transition noise at valve closure.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An editor's inference: the same wall-driven, profile-adjusted recipe could be adapted to other valve-driven cavities where a single dominant inflow jet forms a ring, with the two-diameter tube rule and tanh profile as natural first guesses.
  • The uniform $k=4$ wall scaling is a testable simplification; if patient-specific wall kinematics are imposed instead, the ring's tilt and instability may change, which would mark the boundary of the recipe's validity.
  • Global convergence of total kinetic energy does not guarantee convergence of local vortex topology; a local metric such as the position and radius of the Q-criterion isosurface would strengthen the recipe.
  • The paper frames the vortex ring as the validation target; linking its tilt and dissipation timing to clinical indexes of diastolic function would be a direct next step.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents a practical CFD configuration guide for simulating the left-ventricular vortex ring. Using an idealized semi-ellipsoidal LV geometry from Zheng et al. [15] and two patient-specific geometries that are introduced but not subsequently simulated in detail, the authors test moving versus fixed walls, inlet spatial profiles (plug, parabolic, hyperbolic tangent), inlet tube lengths, and outlet boundary conditions in Star-CCM+, and cross-validate the recommended setup in Ansys Fluent. The central recommendation is: laminar, incompressible Newtonian blood; moving walls driven by the integrated flow-rate curve with a fixed axis ratio; a velocity or mass-flow inlet with a hyperbolic tangent (or plug) profile; an inlet tube length of at least 2D; a mass-flow outlet; and a near-wall-refined mesh. This setup is claimed to capture vortex-ring formation, tilt, instability, and dissipation, with mesh-converged total kinetic energy (relative error below 2%).

Significance. The manuscript addresses a real gap in the cardiovascular CFD literature: most LV flow studies do not document mesh, inlet, outlet, and wall-motion choices in enough detail to be reproduced. The paper's main strengths are its explicit comparison of boundary-condition and mesh choices, its two-solver validation with Star-CCM+ and Ansys Fluent, the absence of fitted parameters, and its connection to the published benchmark of Zheng et al. [15]. If the wall-motion equations are corrected and quantitative vortex-ring metrics are added, the paper would be a useful recipe for researchers working on LV vortex dynamics. As it stands, however, the evidence presented does not fully support the strength of the central claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.4.1, Eqs. (4)-(5)] The wall-scaling equations are inconsistent with the stated geometry. The text says a 4-to-1 ratio is maintained between b(t*) and a(t*) with k=4, and the model has semiaxes a=2 cm and b=8 cm, so b/a=4. However, Eq. (5) reads a(t*)=k b(t*), which with k=4 gives a=4b; Eq. (4) is consistent with a=k b, not with b=k a. Please correct Eqs. (4)-(5) (e.g., b(t*)=k a(t*) with the corresponding volume formula) and verify that the morphing implementation used the intended ratio. As written, the recipe cannot be reproduced without guessing which relation was actually coded.
  2. [Section 3, Fig. 6, Tab. 3] The mesh-convergence claim rests entirely on the total kinetic energy integrated over the ventricular cavity, excluding the tubes. TKE is a global volume-integrated quantity, so localized errors in vortex-ring circulation, core position, tilt angle, or dissipation timing can cancel in the integral. Since the paper's central claim concerns the vortex ring, the 2% TKE error does not by itself demonstrate that the ring features are mesh-converged. Please report quantitative vortex-ring metrics (e.g., circulation, ring centroid path, tilt angle, isosurface volume, or enstrophy) for the mesh study and for the Fluent/Star-CCM+ comparison, or explicitly qualify the convergence claim as applying only to the volume-integrated TKE.
  3. [Section 2.4.1] The moving-wall model imposes a spatially uniform scaling of the semi-ellipsoid with a fixed axis ratio. This is a uniform, twist-free deformation that does not represent real LV contraction and relaxation patterns. Moreover, although patient-specific geometries are introduced in Section 2.1 and mentioned in the abstract, no patient-specific wall-motion or vortex-ring results are presented, so the transferability of the recommended recipe to patient-specific cases is not demonstrated. Please state this limitation explicitly; if patient-specific guidance is part of the paper's scope, add at least one patient-specific demonstration or a sensitivity test to nonuniform wall motion.
  4. [Section 2.2] The recommended setup assumes laminar flow, but the text itself characterizes LV flow as transitional and reports Re≈5500 and α≈31. The laminar assumption is justified only by references [22,23], with no sensitivity test in the present moving-wall geometry. Since this is a practical guide whose recommendations others will adopt, please add a brief quantitative check (e.g., TKE or vortex-metric time histories from a scale-resolving or RANS computation on at least one configuration), or explicitly state that the laminar recommendation is inherited from the literature and may not hold for all patient-specific cases.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table 3] The text says that three mesh sizes were tested for each solver, but Table 3 lists four rows for each solver; the element counts are also given as bare numbers (0.3, 0.6, etc.) without units. Please harmonize the mesh descriptions and label the units (millions of cells).
  2. [Eq. (8)] The normalization constant C in the hyperbolic tangent inlet profile is never specified or given a normalization condition. Since the flow rate must be matched exactly for reproducibility, please provide the value of C or the equation that determines it.
  3. [Section 2.4.1] The comparison between fixed and moving walls is described only qualitatively (fixed walls 'were unable to accurately model the flow dynamics'). Because the moving-wall recommendation is central to the guide, a quantitative comparison (e.g., TKE or vortex metrics for both cases) would make the argument more persuasive.
  4. [Section 2.2] The paragraph beginning 'Given that the blood flow within the LV chambers is characterized by a regime of transition to turbulence' appears to contradict the subsequent conclusion that laminar modeling is sufficient; please rephrase to avoid confusing readers about the paper's actual turbulence-modeling recommendation.
  5. [Introduction] The claim that 'there are currently no articles in the literature' providing such a comprehensive guide is very strong and not supported by a systematic literature search; please soften the wording or provide a more targeted review of existing guidelines.
  6. [References [13] and Introduction] Reference [13] is a project website rather than a peer-reviewed article, and the text says the practical guide 'can be found in Ref. [13]' even though the current article itself is framed as the guide. Please clarify the relationship between this article and the online tutorial.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the simulation recipe is benchmark reproduction against an external reference with independent-solver validation.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is a configuration recipe, not a derived prediction. The wall motion is obtained by integrating the external flow-rate data of Zheng et al. [15] (Eqs. 4-5), and the inlet/outlet conditions are imposed from the same data; these are inputs, not fitted outputs. The vortex-ring formation, tilt, instability, and dissipation shown in Figs. 5 and 7 are emergent flow features, not quantities defined to match the inputs. Validation rests on (i) mesh-convergence of total kinetic energy in both Star-CCM+ and Ansys Fluent (Fig. 6, Tab. 3), with Fluent an independent solver, and (ii) qualitative agreement with the external Ref. [15] Fig. 3. The companion references [13] and [27] are self-citations, but the load-bearing validation data (TKE curves, Q-criterion isosurfaces, element counts) are reproduced in this paper, so the argument does not reduce to the self-citations. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction and no uniqueness theorem is imported. A separate reproducibility issue exists in Eqs. (4)-(5): with a=2 cm and b=8 cm, the stated k=4 ratio implies b(t*)=4a(t*), while Eq. (5) writes a(t*)=k b(t*), which is inconsistent; this is a correctness/typo concern, not circularity. Overall score 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities and no target-driven fitted parameters. It relies on standard CFD domain assumptions: Newtonian blood, laminar treatment at high nominal Re, uniform idealized wall motion, and reference geometry and flow data. The only explicit tuning constant is C for matching the tanh inlet flow rate.

free parameters (1)
  • C (hyperbolic tangent inlet profile normalization constant) = not reported
    Introduced in Eq. (8) to match the total flow rate of the tanh profile to the plug profile. It is a normalization constant that affects the inlet velocity distribution, though it is not fitted to vortex-ring outcomes.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Blood is treated as an incompressible Newtonian fluid with constant density and viscosity (Section 2.2).
    Standard for large-artery and ventricular flow at these scales, but it neglects shear-thinning and other non-Newtonian effects.
  • domain assumption The flow is assumed laminar despite Re approximately 5500 and Womersley number approximately 31 (Section 2.2 and Section 2.4).
    Adopted from Refs. [22,23] because the vortex ring forms in early diastole at low velocity; no laminar-versus-turbulent comparison is performed in this paper.
  • domain assumption The ventricular wall expands and contracts uniformly as a semi-ellipsoid while preserving the 4:1 axis ratio between b(t) and a(t) (Section 2.4.1, Eqs. 4-5).
    This ignores real ventricular twisting, regional wall-motion heterogeneity, and base-to-apex timing differences.
  • domain assumption The idealized geometry and the inlet flow-rate waveform from Ref. [15] are representative physiological inputs for the left ventricle.
    The recommendations are calibrated to this specific benchmark geometry and waveform, so transfer to other geometries is assumed rather than demonstrated.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Modeling heart flow dynamics using numerical simulations to identify the vortex ring: a practical guide." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KFGRIIMN

@misc{pith2026241116661,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Modeling heart flow dynamics using numerical simulations to identify the vortex ring: a practical guide},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KFGRIIMN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16661}
}
read the original abstract

In this study, we present a comprehensive numerical analysis of blood flow within human left ventricle models, with particular emphasis on optimizing simulation conditions to enhance the realism and computational efficiency of heart flow dynamics. The objective is to determine the most effective mesh configurations, flow conditions, and boundary settings necessary for accurately capturing the formation and behavior of the vortex ring, a pivotal element in ventricular flow dynamics. Utilizing a computational fluid mechanics approach, we review the influence of both idealized and patient specific geometries on simulation outcomes. It is imperative to consider the necessity of dynamic wall motion and the precise calibration of inlet and outlet boundary conditions, which must be designed to mimic physiological conditions as accurately as possible. These factors are of paramount importance in achieving a balance between computational resource demands and the fidelity of the simulations, thereby providing valuable insights for future cardiovascular modeling efforts.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16661 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Left ventricle models, increasingly more realistic from left to right. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Ideal geometry of the LV model extracted from Zheng [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Illustration of the mesh for the properties detailed in Tab. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (Top) A detailed plot of the volumetric flow rate of the LV model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Each column represents a different inlet spatial profile: a) Plug; b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Evolution of the TKE for a heart cycle for different mesh sizes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Isocontours of the Q-Criterion inside the ventricular cavity that show [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages

  1. [15]

    and Mittal, R., 2012

    Zheng, X., Seo, J.H., Vedula, V ., Abraham, T. and Mittal, R., 2012. Com- putational modeling and analysis of intracardiac flows in simple mod- els of the left ventricle. Eur . J. Mech. B Fluids , 35, pp.31-39. https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.euromechflu.2012.03.002

    doi:10.1016/j.euromechflu.2012.03.002 2012

  2. [1]

    and Nu- gent, R., 2017

    Dorairaj, P., Shuchi, A., Gaziano, T.A., Mbanya, J.C., Wu, Y . and Nu- gent, R., 2017. Disease control priorities: volume 5. Cardiovascular, respiratory, and related disorders. Disease control priorities: volume

    work page 2017

  3. [2]

    lifex-cfd: an open-source computational fluid dynamics solver for cardiovascular applications

    Africa, P.C., Fumagalli, I., Bucelli, M., Zingaro, A., Fedele, M. and Quar- teroni, A., 2024. "lifex-cfd: An open-source computational fluid dynam- ics solver for cardiovascular applications."Comput. Phys. Commun., 296, p.109039. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2304.12032

    work page Pith review arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.12032 2024

  4. [3]

    Design and Analysis of a Polymeric Left Ventricular Simulator via Computational Mod- elling

    Baturalp, T.B. and Bozkurt, S., 2024. "Design and Analysis of a Polymeric Left Ventricular Simulator via Computational Mod- elling." Biomimetics, 9(5), p.269. https://doi.org/10.3390/ biomimetics9050269

    work page 2024

  5. [4]

    Numerical simula- tions of blood flow through left ventricle using sph and fvm meth- ods – a comparative study

    Topalovi ´c., M., Aleksandar, S., Bodi ´c., Miloš„ S., Peši ´c,., Miljan, S., Miloševi ´c., Miroslav, M., Živkovi ´c. 2023. "Numerical simula- tions of blood flow through left ventricle using sph and fvm meth- ods – a comparative study." J. Serb. Soc. Comput. Mech. , 17(2). 10.24874/jsscm.2023.17.02.02

    work page doi:10.24874/jsscm.2023.17.02.02 2023

  6. [5]

    Cardiovascular , respiratory, and related disorders. , (Ed. 3). https: //openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/28875

    work page

  7. [6]

    CT-Based Analysis of Left Ventricular Hemody- namics Using Statistical Shape Modeling and Computational Fluid Dy- namics

    Goubergrits, L., Vellguth, K., Obermeier, L., Schlief, A., Tautz, L., Bruening, J., Lamecker, H., Szengel, A., Nemchyna, O., Knosalla, C. and Kuehne, T., 2022. "CT-Based Analysis of Left Ventricular Hemody- namics Using Statistical Shape Modeling and Computational Fluid Dy- namics." Front. Cardiovasc. Med., 9, p.901902. https://doi.org/10. 3389/fcvm.2022.901902

    work page arXiv 2022

  8. [7]

    Simcenter STAR-CCM+, version 2023.06, Siemens 2023

    Siemens Industries Digital Software. Simcenter STAR-CCM+, version 2023.06, Siemens 2023

    work page 2023

Show all 29 references
  1. [8]

    Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis of Blood Flow Through Stented Arteries

    Mohammad, S. and Majumdar, P., 2013. "Computational Fluid Dynamics Analysis of Blood Flow Through Stented Arteries." In ASME Interna- tional Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition (V ol. 56215, p. V03AT03A047). https://doi.org/10.1115/IMECE2013-62407

    2013 doi

  2. [9]

    and Quarteroni, A., 2021

    Zingaro, A., Fumagalli, I., Dede, L., Fedele, M., Africa, P.C., Corno, A.F. and Quarteroni, A., 2021. A geometric multiscale model for the nu- merical simulation of blood flow in the human left heart. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2110.02114

    2021 arXiv

  3. [10]

    and Oertel, H.,

    Schenkel, T., Malve, M., Reik, M., Markl, M., Jung, B. and Oertel, H.,

  4. [11]

    Com- parative numerical study on left ventricular fluid dynamics after dilated cardiomyopathy

    Mangual, J.O., Kraigher-Krainer, E., De Luca, A., Toncelli, L., Shah, A., Solomon, S., Galanti, G., Domenichini, F., Pedrizzetti, G., 2013. Com- parative numerical study on left ventricular fluid dynamics after dilated cardiomyopathy. J. Biomech., 46(10), 1611-1617. https://do...

    2013 doi

  5. [12]

    and Leo, H.L., 2015

    Nguyen, V .T., Wibowo, S.N., Leow, Y .A., Nguyen, H.H., Liang, Z. and Leo, H.L., 2015. A patient-specific computational fluid dynamic model for hemodynamic analysis of left ventricle diastolic dysfunctions. Car- diovasc. Eng. Technol. , 6, pp.412-429. https://doi.org/10.1007/ ...

    2015

  6. [13]

    ModelFLOWs- cardiac: https://modelflows.github.io/modelflowsapp/ cardiacpathologydetection/

    DigitHEART: New tools and models for predicting heart disease progression and treatment response. ModelFLOWs- cardiac: https://modelflows.github.io/modelflowsapp/ cardiacpathologydetection/

  7. [14]

    Left Ventricle Diastolic V ortex Ring Characteriza- tion in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: Insight into Atrio-ventricular Inter- play

    Riva, A., Saitta, S., Sturla, F., Disabato, G., Tondi, L., Camporeale, A., Giese, D., Castelvecchio, S., Menicanti, L., Redaelli, A., Lombardi, 11 M., V otta, E., 2024. Left Ventricle Diastolic V ortex Ring Characteriza- tion in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: Insight into Atrio-vent...

    2024

  8. [16]

    Ansys Fluent Academic Research, Release 2023 R1, Help System, Ansys Fluent Theory Guide, Ansys, inc

    2023

  9. [17]

    and Shadden, S.C., 2021

    Kong, F. and Shadden, S.C., 2021. Whole heart mesh gen- eration for image-based computational simulations by learn- ing free-from deformations. International Conference on Medi- cal Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention , pp. 550-559. Cham: Springer International ...

    2021 doi

  10. [18]

    and Mittal, R., 2014

    Vedula, V ., Fortini, S., Seo, J.H., Querzoli, G. and Mittal, R., 2014. Com- putational modeling and validation of intraventricular flow in a simple model of the left ventricle. Theor . Comput. Fluid Dyn., 28, pp.589-604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00162-014-0335-4

    2014 doi

  11. [19]

    and Leylek, J.H., 2023

    Simpson, J.P. and Leylek, J.H., 2023. The influence of Womersley num- ber on non-Newtonian effects: Transient computational study of blood rheology. J. Fluids Eng. , 145(1), p.011206. https://doi.org/10. 1115/1.4055400

    2023

  12. [20]

    Centro Nacional de Investigaciones Cardiovasculares (CNIC) https:// www.cnic.es/es

  13. [21]

    and Berg, P., 2023

    Korte, J., Rauwolf, T., Thiel, J.N., Mitrasch, A., Groschopp, P., Neidlin, M., Schmeißer, A., Braun-Dullaeus, R. and Berg, P., 2023. Hemodynamic Assessment of the Pathological Left Ventricle Function under Rest and Exercise Conditions. Fluids, 8(2), p.71. https://doi.org/10.33...

    2023

  14. [22]

    and Quar- teroni, A., 2023

    Bucelli, M., Zingaro, A., Africa, P.C., Fumagalli, I., Dede’, L. and Quar- teroni, A., 2023. A mathematical model that integrates cardiac elec- trophysiology, mechanics, and fluid dynamics: Application to the hu- man left heart. Int. J. Numer . Methods Biomed., 39(3), p.e3678....

    2023 doi

  15. [23]

    and Quarteroni, A., 2017

    Tagliabue, A., Dedè, L. and Quarteroni, A., 2017. Complex blood flow patterns in an idealized left ventricle: a numerical study. Chaos, 27(9). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5002120

    2017 doi

  16. [24]

    and Wu, Z., 2022

    He, G., Han, L., Zhang, J., Shah, A., Kaczorowski, D.J., Griffith, B.P. and Wu, Z., 2022. Numerical study of the effect of LV AD inflow can- nula positioning on thrombosis risk.Comput. Methods. Biomech. Biomed. Engin., 25(8), pp.852-860. https://doi.org/10.1080/10255842. 2021.1984433

    2022

  17. [25]

    V ortex for- mation and instability in the left ventricle

    Le, T.B., Sotiropoulos, F., Coffey, D. and Keefe, D., 2012. "V ortex for- mation and instability in the left ventricle." Phys. Fluids, 24(9)

    2012

  18. [26]

    and Tonti, G., 2014

    Pedrizzetti, G., La Canna, G., Alfieri, O. and Tonti, G., 2014. The vor- tex—an early predictor of cardiovascular outcome?. Nat. Rev. Cardiol. , 11(9), pp.545-553. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrcardio.2014.75

    2014 doi

  19. [27]

    On the numerical simulation of left ventricle blood flow

    Lazpita, E., Nagargoje, M. S., Mares, A., Quintero, P., Neidlin, M., Le Clainche, S., Garicano-Mena, J., 2024. "On the numerical simulation of left ventricle blood flow." 9th European Congress on Computational Methods in Applied Sciences and Engineering . 12

    2024

  20. [28]

    The MathWorks, Inc. (2022). MATLAB version: 9.13.0 (R2022b). Avail- able: https://www.mathworks.com

    2022

  21. [2009]

    Annals of Biomed

    MRI-based CFD analysis of flow in a human left ventricle: method- ology and application to a healthy heart. Annals of Biomed. Eng. , 37, pp.503-515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10439-008-9627-4

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.