Back

Hemodynamic Analysis of a Repaired Ascending Aorta with Preserved Aortic Root

Zhai, H.; Chen, Y.; Kitada, Y.; Takayama, H.; Vedula, V.

2026-01-29 bioengineering
10.64898/2026.01.28.702307 bioRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeTo evaluate the hemodynamic impact of restoring a normal sino-tubular junction (STJ) following a novel Hegar dilator-based procedure in patients undergoing root-sparing ascending thoracic aortic aneurysm (ATAA) repair using computational modeling. MethodsWe retrospectively selected an ATAA patient who underwent pre- and postoperative gated computed tomography angiography (CTA). We developed a novel workflow to segment the lumen, thick-walled aorta, and aortic valve from CTA images for subsequent blood flow analysis using computational fluid dynamics (CFD) and fluid-structure interaction (FSI). Morphological and hemodynamic characteristics of the root were quantified and compared against those of a control subject, with no noted ascending aortic dilation. The models sensitivity to graft properties and leaflet material heterogeneity was analyzed. ResultsBoth CFD and FSI results showed that the postoperative geometry reconstructed with a normal STJ profile reintroduces sinus vortices during peak systole, similar to the control subject, but were absent pre-surgery. Accounting for aortic valve leaflets in FSI studies yielded qualitatively similar results to the CFD cases, albeit with locally elevated velocities, time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS), and energy dissipation, likely due to the dynamically changing orifice area and differing profiles of the left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT). ConclusionWe demonstrated that the novel Hegar dilator-based STJ reconstruction restores normal blood flow patterns, highlighting the importance of reprofiling the aortic sinuses and STJ. The study also highlights the models sensitivities, particularly the LVOT shape and leaflet morphology and mobility, and may assist planning STJ reconstruction to yield optimal hemodynamics before intervention.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biomechanics and Modeling in Mechanobiology
25 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.7%
2
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
Annals of Biomedical Engineering
34 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.4%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 22%
8.4%
5
International Journal for Numerical Methods in Biomedical Engineering
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.2%
6
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 6%
6.4%
50% of probability mass above
7
Journal of Biomechanics
57 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.9%
8
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 24%
4.9%
9
Journal of Biomechanical Engineering
17 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
10
Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
11
Arteriosclerosis, Thrombosis, and Vascular Biology
65 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.1%
12
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
14 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.6%
13
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
14
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
2.1%
15
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.8%
16
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
17
Acta Biomaterialia
85 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
18
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.8%
19
Journal of Applied Physiology
29 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%
20
Bioengineering
24 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
21
European Radiology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%