ArticleCardiovascular ultrasound2012
Effects of ultrasound and ultrasound contrast agent on vascular tissue.
Article in Cardiovascular ultrasound, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Contrast-enhanced echocardiographic diagnosis of benign and malignant cardiac tumors and its correlation with pathology.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Contrast Ultrasound Imaging Does Not Affect Heat Shock Protein 70 Expression in Cholesterol-Fed Rabbit Aorta.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2015Article
- Contrast Ultrasound Imaging of the Aorta Does Not Affect Progression of Atherosclerosis or Cardiovascular Biomarkers in ApoE-/- Mice.Journal of ultrasound in medicine : official journal of the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine · 2015Article
- Ultrasound-mediated drug delivery for cardiovascular disease.Expert opinion on drug delivery · 2013Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUltrasound (US) imaging can be enhanced using gas-filled microbubble contrast agents. Strong echo signals are induced at the tissue-gas interface following microbubble collapse. Applications include assessment of ventricular function and virtual histology.
aimWhile ultrasound and US contrast agents are widely used, their impact on the physiological response of vascular tissue to vasoactive agents has not been investigated in detail. METHODS AND
resultsIn the present study, rat dorsal aortas were treated with US via a clinical imaging transducer in the presence or absence of the US contrast agent, Optison. Aortas treated with both US and Optison were unable to contract in response to phenylephrine or to relax in the presence of acetylcholine. Histology of the arteries was unremarkable. When the treated aortas were stained for endothelial markers, a distinct loss of endothelium was observed. Importantly, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase mediated dUTP nick-end-labeling (TUNEL) staining of treated aortas demonstrated incipient apoptosis in the endothelium.
conclusionsTaken together, these ex vivo results suggest that the combination of US and Optison may alter arterial integrity and promote vascular injury; however, the in vivo interaction of Optison and ultrasound remains an open question.
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.