Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21494804›Full record

ReviewPflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology2011

Assessment of contractility in intact ventricular cardiomyocytes using the dimensionless 'Frank-Starling Gain' index.

Christian Bollensdorff, Oleg Lookin, Peter Kohl

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Transmural cellular heterogeneity in myocardial electromechanics.The journal of physiological sciences : JPS · 2018
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Load-dependent effects of apelin on murine cardiomyocytes.Progress in biophysics and molecular biology · 2017
    Article
  14. Mechano-chemo-transduction in cardiac myocytes.The Journal of physiology · 2017
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Which way to grow? Force over time may be the heart'sGlobal cardiology science & practice · 2016
    Article
  17. Fibrous scaffolds for building hearts and heart parts.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2016
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Biomechanics of Cardiac Function.Comprehensive Physiology · 2015
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Christian BollensdorffCardiac Biophysics and Systems Biology, The National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, UK. c.bollensdorff@imperial.ac.uk
Oleg Lookin
Peter Kohl
Imperial College London · GBInstitute of Immunology and Physiology · RU

Funding

British Heart Foundation PG/09/031/27221
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This paper briefly recapitulates the Frank-Starling law of the heart, reviews approaches to establishing diastolic and systolic force-length behaviour in intact isolated cardiomyocytes, and introduces a dimensionless index called 'Frank-Starling Gain', calculated as the ratio of slopes of end-systolic and end-diastolic force-length relations. The benefits and limitations of this index are illustrated on the example of regional differences in Guinea pig intact ventricular cardiomyocyte mechanics. Potential applicability of the Frank-Starling Gain for the comparison of cell contractility changes upon stretch will be discussed in the context of intra- and inter-individual variability of cardiomyocyte properties.

Indexed as

AnimalsModels, CardiovascularMyocardial ContractionMyocytes, CardiacStress, Mechanical

Identifiers

PMID21494804
PMCPMC3114067
OpenAlexW2163572718

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.