ArticleThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America2017
Acoustic force measurements on polymer-coated microbubbles in a microfluidic device.
Article in The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Optical manipulation: advances for biophotonics in the 21st century.Journal of biomedical optics · 2021Review
- Acoustofluidic Measurements on Polymer-Coated Microbubbles: Primary and Secondary Bjerknes Forces.Micromachines · 2018Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This work presents an acoustofluidic device for manipulating coated microbubbles, designed for the simultaneous use of optical and acoustical tweezers. A comprehensive characterization of the acoustic pressure in the device is presented, obtained by the synergic use of different techniques in the range of acoustic frequencies where visual observations showed aggregation of polymer-coated microbubbles. In absence of bubbles, the combined use of laser vibrometry and finite element modelling supported a non-invasive measurement of the acoustic pressure and an enhanced understanding of the system resonances. Calibrated holographic optical tweezers were used for direct measurements of the acoustic forces acting on an isolated microbubble, at low driving pressures, and to confirm the spatial distribution of the acoustic field. This allowed quantitative acoustic pressure measurements by particle tracking, using polystyrene beads, and an evaluation of the related uncertainties. This process facilitated the extension of tracking to microbubbles, which have a negative acoustophoretic contrast factor, allowing acoustic force measurements on bubbles at higher pressures than optical tweezers, highlighting four peaks in the acoustic response of the device. Results and methodologies are relevant to acoustofluidic applications requiring a precise characterization of the acoustic field and, in general, to biomedical applications with microbubbles or deformable particles.
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.