Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29252142›Full record

ReviewLymphatic research and biology2017

Experimental Models Used to Assess Lymphatic Contractile Function.

Scott D Zawieja, Jorge A Castorena-Gonzalez, Brandon Dixon, Michael J Davis

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Lymphatic research and biology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Modeling Immunity In Vitro: Slices, Chips, and Engineered Tissues.Annual review of biomedical engineering · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Transport functions of intestinal lymphatic vessels.Nature reviews. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Biochemical and mechanical signals in the lymphatic vasculature.Cellular and molecular life sciences : CMLS · 2021
    Review
  11. Frontiers in physiology · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Kir6.1-dependent KThe Journal of physiology · 2020
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Cardiac lymphatics in health and disease.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2019
    Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Scott D Zawieja1 Department of Medical Pharmacology and Physiology, University of Missouri , Columbia, Missouri.
Jorge A Castorena-Gonzalez1 Department of Medical Pharmacology and Physiology, University of Missouri , Columbia, Missouri.
Brandon Dixon2 George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology , Atlanta, Georgia .
Michael J Davis1 Department of Medical Pharmacology and Physiology, University of Missouri , Columbia, Missouri.

Funding

Lymphatic pacemaking and pumping in lymphedema: function, dysfunction, and rescueR01HL122578 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI DAVIS, MICHAEL JOHN · 2015 to 2023
$4.1M
Transport Phenomena in the Lymphatic SystemU01HL123420 · NHLBI · TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCE CTR · PI MOORE, JAMES E, ZAWIEJA, DAVID CARL · 2014 to 2018
$2.9M
Quantifying the role of load-induced remodeling in lymphedema progressionR01HL113061 · NHLBI · GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY · PI DIXON, JAMES BRANDON · 2013 to 2017
$2.2M
Conduction and coordination of electrical signals within the lymphatic vascular wallR01HL125608 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI DAVIS, MICHAEL JOHN · 2015 to 2018
$1.6M
Mechanisms of lymphatic valve and pump dysfunction in lymphedemaR01HL120867 · NHLBI · UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI-COLUMBIA · PI DAVIS, MICHAEL JOHN · 2014 to 2017
$1.5M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL113061NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL120867NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL122578NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL125608NHLBI NIH HHS U01 HL123420
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Recent years have seen a renewed interest in studies of the lymphatic system. This review addresses the differences between in vivo and ex vivo methods for visualization and functional studies of lymphatic networks, with an emphasis on studies of collecting lymphatic vessels. We begin with a brief summary of the historical uses of both approaches. For the purpose of detailed comparisons, we subdivide in vivo methods into those visualizing lymphatic networks through the intact skin and those using surgically opened skin. We subdivide ex vivo methods into isobaric studies (using a pressure myograph) or isometric studies (using a wire myograph). For all four categories, we compile a comprehensive list of the advantages, disadvantages, and limitations of each preparation, with the goal of informing the research community as to the appropriate kinds of experiments best suited, and ill suited, for each.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalMuscle ContractionVasoconstrictionAnimalsBiomarkersHumansLymphatic VesselsMicroscopyMuscle, Smooth, VascularBiomarkersimagingintravitalNIRFpressure

Identifiers

PMID29252142
PMCPMC5734151

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.