Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19197316›Full record

ArticleNature nanotechnology2009

Carbon nanotubes might improve neuronal performance by favouring electrical shortcuts.

Giada Cellot, Emanuele Cilia, Sara Cipollone, Vladimir Rancic, Antonella Sucapane, Silvia Giordani, Luca Gambazzi, Henry Markram, Micaela Grandolfo, Denis Scaini and 5 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Nature nanotechnology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 134 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
134citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

134 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Advances in Engineering Human Tissue Models.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Electrical Microneedles for Wound Treatment.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2025
    Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

74 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Giada CellotLife Science Department, B.R.A.I.N., University of Trieste, via Fleming 22, I-34127, Trieste, Italy.
Emanuele Cilia
Sara Cipollone
Vladimir Rancic
Antonella Sucapane
Silvia Giordani
Luca Gambazzi
Henry Markram
Micaela Grandolfo
Denis Scaini
Fabrizio Gelain
Loredana Casalis
Maurizio Prato
Michele Giugliano
Laura Ballerini

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Carbon nanotubes have been applied in several areas of nerve tissue engineering to probe and augment cell behaviour, to label and track subcellular components, and to study the growth and organization of neural networks. Recent reports show that nanotubes can sustain and promote neuronal electrical activity in networks of cultured cells, but the ways in which they affect cellular function are still poorly understood. Here, we show, using single-cell electrophysiology techniques, electron microscopy analysis and theoretical modelling, that nanotubes improve the responsiveness of neurons by forming tight contacts with the cell membranes that might favour electrical shortcuts between the proximal and distal compartments of the neuron. We propose the 'electrotonic hypothesis' to explain the physical interactions between the cell and nanotube, and the mechanisms of how carbon nanotubes might affect the collective electrical activity of cultured neuronal networks. These considerations offer a perspective that would allow us to predict or engineer interactions between neurons and carbon nanotubes.

Indexed as

Neural ConductionAction PotentialsAnimalsBiocompatible MaterialsCell AdhesionCells, CulturedElectric CapacitanceElectric StimulationMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningNanotechnologyNanotubes, CarbonNeuronsPatch-Clamp TechniquesRatsTissue ScaffoldsBiocompatible MaterialsNanotubes, Carbon

Identifiers

PMID19197316

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.