ArticleScientific reports2017
Minimally Invasive Micro-Indentation: mapping tissue mechanics at the tip of an 18G needle.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Innovative Photonic Sensors for Safety and Security, Part III: Environment, Agriculture and Soil Monitoring.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Integrating mechanical sensor readouts into organ-on-a-chip platforms.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2022Review
- Lab-On-Fiber Technology: A Roadmap toward Multifunctional Plug and Play Platforms.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Comparison of frequency and strain-rate domain mechanical characterization.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Regional variations in stiffness in live mouse brain tissue determined by depth-controlled indentation mapping.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Stiffening of the nucleus pulposus upon axial loading of the intervertebral disc: An experimental in situ study.JOR spine · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Experiments regarding the mechanical properties of soft tissues mostly rely on data collected on specimens that are extracted from their native environment. During the extraction and in the time period between the extraction and the completion of the measurements, however, the specimen may undergo structural changes which could generate unwanted artifacts. To further investigate the role of mechanics in physiology and possibly use it in clinical practices, it is thus of paramount importance to develop instruments that could measure the viscoelastic response of a tissue without necessarily excising it. Tantalized by this opportunity, we have designed a minimally invasive micro-indenter that is able to probe the mechanical response of soft tissues, in situ, via an 18G needle. Here, we discuss its working principle and validate its usability by mapping the viscoelastic properties of a complex, confined sample, namely, the nucleus pulposus of the intervertebral disc. Our findings show that the mechanical properties of a biological tissue in its local environment may be indeed different than those that one would measure after excision, and thus confirm that, to better understand the role of mechanics in life sciences, one should always perform minimally invasive measurements like those that we have here introduced.
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.