ArticleArchives of oral biology2016
Tongue implant for assistive technologies: Test of migration, tissue reactivity and impact on tongue function.
Article in Archives of oral biology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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.
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, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assistive Technologies and Quadriplegia: A Map Point on the Development and Spread of the Tongue Barbell Piercing.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Clinical viability of magnetic bead implants in muscle.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Article
- A Dual-Mode Magnetic-Acoustic System for Monitoring Fluid Intake Behavior in Animals.IEEE transactions on bio-medical engineering · 2017Article
- Magnetic implants in the tongue for assistive technologies: Tests of migration; oromotor function; and tissue response in miniature pigs.Archives of oral biology · 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThe Tongue Drive System (TDS) is a new wearable assistive technology (AT), developed to translate voluntary tongue movements to user-defined computer commands by tracking the position of a titanium-encased magnetic tracer (Ti-Mag) implanted into the tongue. TDS application, however, is constrained by limited information on biological consequence and safety of device implantation into the tongue body. Here we implant a stainless-steel pellet in the rat tongue and assay pellet migration, tongue lick function, and tongue histology to test the safety and biocompatibility of unanchored tongue implants.
designWater consumption, weight and lick behavior were measured before and for >24days after implantation of a stainless-steel spherical pellet (0.5mm) into the anterior tongue body of twelve adult male rats. X-rays were obtained weekly to assess pellet migration. Pellet location and tissue reaction to implantation were determined by post-mortem dissection and histology of the anterior tongue.
resultsBy dissection pellets were distributed across the transverse plane of the tongue. Measures of water consumption, weight, and lick behavior were unchanged by implantation except for a decrease in consumption immediately post-implantation in some animals. By X-ray, there was no migration of the implant, a finding supported by pellet encapsulation demonstrated histologically. Measures of lick behavior were minimally impacted by implantation.
conclusionA smooth spherical stainless-steel implant in the anterior tongue of the rat does not migrate, is encapsulated and does not substantially impact lick behavior. These findings support the implantation of small tracers in the anterior tongue in humans for operating wearable assistive technologies.
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.