Article citationsMore>>

R. Fodil, L. Brugel-Ribere, C. Croce, G. Sbirlea-Apiou, C. Larger, J. F. Papon, C. Delclaux, A. Coste, D. Isabey and B. Louis, “Inspiratory Flow in the Nose: A Model Coupling Flow and Vasoerectile Tissue Distensibility,” Journal of Applied Physiology, Vol. 98, No. 1, 2005, pp. 288-295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00625.2004

has been cited by the following article:

• TITLE: Effect of Laryngopharyngeal Anatomy on Expiratory Airflow and Submicrometer Particle Deposition in Human Extrathoracic Airways

  AUTHORS: Xiuhua Si, Jinxiang Xi, Jongwon Kim

  KEYWORDS: Medical Image-Based Modeling; Nasal Airflow; Uvula; Breathing Resistance; Nanoparticle Deposition

  JOURNAL NAME: Open Journal of Fluid Dynamics, Vol.3 No.4, December 4, 2013

  ABSTRACT: The objective of this study is to systematically assess the influences of the larynopharyneal anatomical details on airflow and particle behaviors during exhalation by means of image-based modeling. A physiologically realistic nose-throat airway was developed with medical images. Individual airway anatomy such as uvula, pharynx, and larynx were then isolated for examination by progressively simplifying this image-based model geometry. Low Reynolds number (LRN) k-w model and Langrangian tracking model were used to simulate the dynamics of airflow and particle transport for a wide range of exhalation conditions (4-45 L/min) and particle sizes (1 nm-1 μm). Results showed that pharyngeal anatomical details exerted a significant impact on breathing resistance and particle profiles. Abrupt pressure drop resulting from the uvula-related airway obstruction was observed. Even though the total deposition rate in the nasal airway is largely unaffected by the upstream effect, the local deposition patterns vary notably. Results of this study also indicate that the pressure drop appears to be an appropriate parameter to characterize the geometric variations for diffusive depositions. Inclusion of pressure drop (D0.5Q-0.62dp0.07) gives an improved correlation than using the conventional diffusion factor (D0.5Q﹣0.28).