Comparison of two different bowel anastomosis types using finite volume method

Basit Öğe Kaydı
dc.authoridpirhan, yavuz / 0000-0002-8234-6739
dc.authoridGok, Kadir / 0000-0001-5736-1884
dc.authorscopusid53865336300
dc.authorscopusid23477095600
dc.authorscopusid55420965900
dc.authorwosidGOK, Arif/ABC-4777-2020
dc.authorwosidpirhan, yavuz/Y-4542-2018
dc.contributor.authorPirhan, Yavuz
dc.contributor.authorGök, Kadir
dc.contributor.authorGök, Arif
dc.date.accessioned2022-02-15T16:58:23Z
dc.date.available2022-02-15T16:58:23Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.departmentBakırçay Üniversitesien_US
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to compare side-to-side and functional end-to-end anastomosis techniques that are commonly used in bowel surgery. Considering the dimensions of these two different anastomosis models, SolidWorks program was used for 3 D studies. Intra-intestinal flow analyzes were performed based on the finite volume method using Ansys Fluent, a computational fluid Dynamics (CFD) program. The flow velocity, pressure, turbulent knetic energy, turbulence vortex distribution, vortex viscosity and wall shear stresses for each model were calculated in results of the analysis for the side-to-side and functional end-to-end anastomosis technique. Due to the geometrical structure of the functional end - to - end anastomosis model, turbulence and hence the vortex formation is less than the side - to - side anastomosis technique. Because intersect area of bowels has wider in functional end - to - end anastomosis model, flow become easier than other. In surgical practice, functional end-to-end anastomosis is preferred over side-to-side anastomosis because of the low probability of leakage. It can be noted that the functional end - to - end anastomosis technique will be safer because of less turbulence, based on the data of fluid flow velocities, pressure, turbulent knetic energy, turbulence vortex distribution, vortex viscosity and wall shear stresses in the anastomosis.en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1080/10255842.2020.1722809
dc.identifier.endpage331en_US
dc.identifier.issn1025-5842
dc.identifier.issn1476-8259
dc.identifier.issue8en_US
dc.identifier.pmid32009459en_US
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85078998854en_US
dc.identifier.scopusqualityQ3en_US
dc.identifier.startpage323en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1080/10255842.2020.1722809
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14034/398
dc.identifier.volume23en_US
dc.identifier.wosWOS:000512404300001en_US
dc.identifier.wosqualityQ4en_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakWeb of Scienceen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakScopusen_US
dc.indekslendigikaynakPubMeden_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherTaylor & Francis Ltden_US
dc.relation.journalComputer Methods In Biomechanics And Biomedical Engineeringen_US
dc.relation.publicationcategoryMakale - Uluslararası Hakemli Dergi - Kurum Öğretim Elemanıen_US
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessen_US
dc.subjectSide-to-side anastomosis techniquesen_US
dc.subjectfunctional end-to-end anastomosis techniquesen_US
dc.subjectfluid Dynamicsen_US
dc.subjectfinite volume methoden_US
dc.subjectStapled Anastomosesen_US
dc.subjectHuman-Plateletsen_US
dc.subjectDistalen_US
dc.subjectFlowen_US
dc.subjectEnden_US
dc.titleComparison of two different bowel anastomosis types using finite volume methoden_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Dosyalar

Orijinal paket
Listeleniyor 1 - 1 / 1
Küçük Resim Yok
İsim:
Comparison of two different bowel anastomosis types using finite volume method.pdf
Boyut:
2.39 MB
Biçim:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Açıklama:
Tam Metin / Full Text
İndir

Koleksiyon

WoS İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Biyomedikal Mühendisliği Bölümü Koleksiyonu
PubMed İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu
Scopus İndeksli Yayınlar Koleksiyonu