Trial reportPloS one2012
Effect of topical anaesthetics on interstitial colloid osmotic pressure in human subcutaneous tissue sampled by wick technique.
Trial report in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01044979 (Measurements of Colloid Osmotic Pressure in Interstitial Fluid and Plasma, a Methodological Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Measurements of Colloid Osmotic Pressure in Interstitial Fluid and Plasma, a Methodological Study
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Transcapillary fluid flux and inflammatory response during neonatal therapeutic hypothermia: an open, longitudinal, observational study.BMC pediatrics · 2018Observational
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo measure colloid osmotic pressure in interstitial fluid (COP(i)) from human subcutaneous tissue with the modified wick technique in order to determine influence of topical application of anaesthetics, dry vs. wet wick and implantation time on COP(i). MATERIAL AND
methodsIn 50 healthy volunteers interstitial fluid (IF) was collected by subcutaneous implantation of multi-filamentous nylon wicks. Study subjects were allocated to two groups; one for comparing COP(i) obtained from dry and saline soaked wicks, and one for comparing COP(i) from unanaesthetized skin, and skin after application of a eutectic mixture of local anaesthetic (EMLA®, Astra Zeneca) cream. IF was sampled from the skin of the shoulders, and implantation time was 30, 60, 75, 90 and 120 min. Colloid osmotic pressure was measured with a colloid osmometer. Pain assessment during the procedure was compared for EMLA cream and no topical anaesthesia using a visual analogue scale (VAS) in a subgroup of 10 subjects.
resultsThere were no significant differences between COP(i) obtained from dry compared to wet wicks, except that the values after 75 and 90 min. were somewhat higher for the dry wicks. Topical anaesthesia with EMLA cream did not affect COP(i) values. COP(i) decreased from 30 to 75 min. of implantation (23.2 ± 4.4 mmHg to 19.6 ± 2.9 mmHg, p = 0.008) and subsequently tended to increase until 120 min. EMLA cream resulted in significant lower VAS score for the procedure.
conclusionCOP(i) from subcutaneous tissue was easily obtained and fluid harvesting was well tolerated when topical anaesthetic was used. The difference in COP(i) assessed by dry and wet wicks between 75 min. and 90 min. of implantation was in accordance with previous reports. The use of topical analgesia did not influence COP(i) and topical analgesia may make the wick technique more acceptable for subjects who dislike technical procedures, including children.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01044979.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.