Details
Title
Effects of stent-graft geometry and blood hematocrit on hemodynamic in Abdominal Aortic AneurysmJournal title
Chemical and Process EngineeringYearbook
2012Numer
No 1 MarchAuthors
Keywords
stent-graft ; thrombosis ; CFD ; Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm ; angular bend ; narrownessDivisions of PAS
Nauki TechniczneCoverage
53-61Publisher
Polish Academy of Sciences Committee of Chemical and Process EngineeringDate
2012Type
Artykuły / ArticlesIdentifier
DOI: 10.2478/v10176-012-0005-2 ; ISSN 0208-6425Source
Chemical and Process Engineering; 2012; No 1 March; 53-61References
Aoki Y. (2009), An autopsy case of aortitis resulting in sudden death due to a rupture of aneurysm of the aortic sinus, Leg. Med. (Tokyo), 11, 33, doi.org/10.1016/j.legalmed.2008.07.002 ; Bębenek B. (1999), Flows in a circulatory system, 350. ; Berry J. (2000), Experimental and computational flow evaluation of coronary stents, Ann. Biomed. Eng, 28, 386, doi.org/10.1114/1.276 ; Hoskins P. (2008), Simulation and validation of arterial ultrasound imaging and blood flow, Ultrasound. Med. Biol, 34, 693, doi.org/10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2007.10.017 ; Jung J. (2008), Three-phase CFD analytical modeling of blood flow, Med. Eng. Phys, 30, 91, doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2006.12.004 ; Keyhani K. (2009), Azizzadeh A., Endovascular repair of traumatic aortic injury in a pediatric patient, J. Vasc. Surg, 50, 652, doi.org/10.1016/j.j.vs.2009.04.040 ; Liu B. (2007), The influences of stenosis on the downstream flow pattern in curved arteries, Med. Eng. Phys, 29, 868, doi.org/10.1016/j.medengphy.2006.09.009 ; Owens R. (2006), A new microstructure-based constitutive model for human blood, J. Non-Newtonian Fluid Mech, 140, 57, doi.org/10.1016/j.jnnfm.2006.D1.015 ; Marcinkowska-Gapińska A. (2007), Comparison of three rheological models of shear flow behavior studied on blood samples from post-infarction patients, Med. Biol. Eng. Comput, 45, 837, doi.org/10.1007/s11517-007-0236-4 ; Nguyen K. (2008), Carotid geometry effects on blood flow and on risk for vascular disease, J. Biomech, 41, 11, doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.08.D12 ; Polańczyk A. (2010), CFD simulations of blood flow through abdominal part of aorta, Chall. Modern Technol, 1, 34. ; Polańczyk A. (2010), Blood flow simulation through endovascular prosthesis to patients with Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm, Procesnie Technika, 1, 105. ; Vliet J. (1997), Abdominal aortic aneurysm, Lancet, 349, 863, doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(96)07282-DEditorial Board
Editorial Board
Dorota Antos, Rzeszów University of Technology, Poland
Katarzyna Bizon, Cracow University of Technology, Poland
Tomasz Ciach, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Magdalena Cudak, West Pomeranian University of Technology, Szczecin, Poland
Grzegorz Dzido, Silesian University of Technology, Poland
Marek Dziubiński, Lodz University of Technology, Poland
Leon Gradoń, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Andrzej Górak, TU Dortmund, Germany
Andrzej Heim, Lodz University of Technology, Poland
Marek Henczka, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Andrzej Jarzębski, Silesian University of Technology, Poland
Zdzisław Jaworski, West Pomeranian University of Technology, Szczecin, Poland
Władysław Kamiński, Poland
Bożenna Kawalec-Pietrenko, Poland
Stanisław Ledakowicz, Lodz University of Technology, Poland
Łukasz Makowski, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Eugeniusz Molga, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Andrzej Noworyta, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
Roman Petrus, Rzeszów University of Technology, Poland
Ryszard Pohorecki, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Rafał Rakoczy, West Pomeranian University of Technology, Szczecin, Poland
Andrzej Sobkowiak, Rzeszów University of Technology, Poland
Tomasz Sosnowski, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland
Anna Trusek, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
Kazimiera Wilk, Wrocław University of Science and Technology, Poland
Ireneusz Zbiciński, Lodz University of Technology, Poland
Publication Ethics Policy
ETHICAL PRINCIPLESEditors of the "Chemical and Process Engineering" pay attention to maintain ethical standards in scientific publications and undertake any possible measure to counteract neglecting the standards. Papers submitted for publication are evaluated with respect to reliability, conforming to ethical standards and the advancement of science. Principles given below are based on COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, which may be found at:
http://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf
Authors’ duties
Authorship
Authorship should be limited to persons, who markedly contributed to the idea, project, realization and interpretation of results. All of them have to be listed as co-authors. Other persons, who affected some important parts of the study should be listed or mentioned as co-workers. Author should be certain that all co-authors were enlisted, saw and accepted final version of the paper and agreed upon its publication.
Disclosure and conflict of interests
Author should disclose all sources of financing of his/her study, the input of scientific institutions, associations and other subjects and all important conflicts of interests that might affect results and interpretation of the study.
Standards in reporting
Authors of papers based on original studies should present precise description of performed work and objective discussion on its importance. Source data should be accurately presented in the paper. The paper should contain detailed information and references that would enable others to use it. False or intentionally not true declarations are not ethical and are not accepted by the editors.
Access to and storage of data
Authors may be asked for providing raw data used in the paper for editorial assessment and should be prepared to store them within the reasonable time period after publication.
Multiple, unnecessary and competitive publications
As a rule author should not publish papers describing the same studies in more than one journal or primary publication. Submission of the same paper to more than one journal at the same time is not ethical and prohibited.
Confirmation of sources
Author should cite papers that affected the creation of submitted manuscript and every time he/she should confirm the use of other authors’ work.
Important errors in published papers
When author finds an important error or inaccuracy in his/her paper, he/she is obliged to inform Editorial Office about this as soon as possible.
Originality and plagiarism
Author may submit only original papers. He/she should be certain that the names of authors referred to in the paper and/or fragments of their texts are properly cited or mentioned.
Ghostwriting
Ghost writing/guest authorship are manifestation of scientific unreliability and all such cases will be revealed including notification of appropriate subjects. Signs of scientific unreliability, especially violation of ethical principles in science will be documented by the Editorial Office.
Duties of the Editorial Office
Editors’ duties
Editors know the rules of journal editing including the procedures applied in case of uncovering non-ethical practices.
Decisions on publication
Editor-in Chief is obliged to apply present legal status as to defamation, violation of author’s rights and plagiarism and bears the responsibility for decisions. He/she may consult thematic editors and/or referees in that matter.
Selection of referees
Editorial Office provides appropriate selection of referees and takes care about appropriate course of peer –reviewing (the review has to be substantive).
Confidentiality
Every member of editorial team is not allowed to disclose information about submitted paper to any person except its author, referees, other advisors and editors.
Discrimination
To counteract discrimination the Editorial Office obeys the legally binding rules.
Disclosure and conflict of interests
Not published papers or their fragments cannot be used in the studies of editorial team or ref-erees without written consent of the author.
Referees' duties
Editorial decisions
Referee supports Editor-in-Chief in taking editorial decisions and may also support author in improving the paper.
Back information
In case a selected referee is not able to review the paper or cannot do it in due time period, he/she should inform secretary of the Editorial Office about this fact.
Objectivity standards
Reviews should be objective. Personal criticism is inappropriate. Referees should clearly ex-press their opinions and support them with proper arguments.
Confidentiality
All reviewed papers should be dealt with as confidential. They should not be discussed or revealed to persons other than the secretary of the Editorial Office.
Anonymity
All reviews should be made anonymously and the Editorial Office does not disclose names of the authors to referees.
Disclosure and conflict of interests
Confidential information or ideas resulting from reviewing procedure should be kept secret and should not be used to gain personal benefits. Referees should not review papers, which might generate conflict of interests resulting from relationships with the author, firm or institution involved in the study.
Confirmation of sources
Referees should indicate publications which are not referred to in the paper. Any statement that the observation, source or argument was described previously should be supported by appropriate citation. Referee should also inform the secretary of the Editorial Office about significant similarity to or partial overlapping of the reviewed paper with any other published paper and about suspected plagiarism.