ArticleBiomicrofluidics2016
Micro electrical impedance spectroscopy on a needle for ex vivo discrimination between human normal and cancer renal tissues.
Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The clinical application of electrical impedance technology in the detection of malignant neoplasms: a systematic review.Journal of translational medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Discrimination between human normal renal tissue and renal cell carcinoma by dielectric properties usingFrontiers in physiology · 2023Article
- Affordable, portable and self-administrable electrical impedance tomography enables global and regional lung function assessment.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Fabrication of Fine Electrodes on the Tip of Hypodermic Needle Using Photoresist Spray Coating and Flexible Photomask for Biomedical Applications.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The ex-vivo discrimination between human normal and cancer renal tissues was confirmed using μEoN (micro electrical impedance spectroscopy-on-a-needle) by measuring and comparing the electrical impedances in the frequency domain. To quantify the extent of discrimination between dissimilar tissues and to determine the optimal frequency at which the discrimination capability is at a maximum, discrimination index (DI) was employed for both magnitude and phase. The highest values of DI for the magnitude and phase were 5.15 at 1 MHz and 3.57 at 1 kHz, respectively. The mean magnitude and phase measured at the optimal frequency for normal tissues were 5013.40 ± 94.39 Ω and -68.54 ± 0.72°, respectively; those for cancer tissues were 4165.19 ± 70.32 Ω and -64.10 ± 0.52°, respectively. A statistically significant difference (p< 0.05) between the two tissues was observed at all the investigated frequencies. To extract the electrical properties (resistance and capacitance) of these bio-tissues through curve fitting with experimental results, an equivalent circuit was proposed based on the μEoN structure on the condition that the μEoN was immersed in the bio-tissues. The average and standard deviation of the extracted resistance and capacitance for the normal tissues were 6.22 ± 0.24 kΩ and 280.21 ± 32.25 pF, respectively, and those for the cancer tissues were 5.45 ± 0.22 kΩ and 376.32 ± 34.14 pF, respectively. The electrical impedance was higher in the normal tissues compared with the cancer tissues. The μEoN could clearly discriminate between normal and cancer tissues by comparing the results at the optimal frequency (magnitude and phase) and those of the curve fitting (extracted resistance and capacitance).
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.