ArticleBiosensors2018
Evaluation of Continuous Lactate Monitoring Systems within a Heparinized In Vivo Porcine Model Intravenously and Subcutaneously.
Article in Biosensors, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Serial Lactate in Clinical Medicine - A Narrative Review.Journal of intensive care medicine · 2026Review
- Real-Time,ACS sensors · 2022Review
- Evaluation of an Anti-Thrombotic Continuous Lactate and Blood Pressure Monitoring Catheter in an In Vivo Piglet Model undergoing Open-Heart Surgery with Cardiopulmonary Bypass.Chemosensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Monitoring with In Vivo Electrochemical Sensors: Navigating the Complexities of Blood and Tissue Reactivity.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Early prediction of circulatory failure in the intensive care unit using machine learning.Nature medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We present an animal model used to evaluate the in vivo performance of electrochemical amperometric continuous lactate sensors compared to blood gas instruments. Electrochemical lactate sensors were fabricated, placed into 5 Fr central venous catheters (CVCs), and paired with wireless potentiostat devices. Following in vivo evaluation and calibration, sensors were placed within the jugular and femoral veins of a porcine subject as a preliminary assessment of in vivo measurement accuracy. The mobile electronic circuit potentiostat devices supplied the operational voltage for the sensors, measured the resultant steady-state current, and recorded the sensor response values in internal memory storages. An in vivo time trace of implanted intravenous (IV) sensors demonstrated lactate values that correlated well with the discrete measurements of blood samples on a benchtop point-of-care sensor-based instrument. Currents measured continuously from the implanted lactate sensors over 10 h were converted into lactate concentration values through use of a two-point in vivo calibration. Study shows that intravenously implanted sensors had more accurate readings, faster peak-reaching rates, and shorter peak-detection times compared to subcutaneously placed sensors. IV implanted and subcutaneously placed sensors closer to the upper body (in this case neck) showed faster response rates and more accurate measurements compared to those implanted in the lower portion of the porcine model. This study represents an important milestone not only towards continuous lactate monitoring for early diagnosis and intervention in neonatal patients with congenital heart disease undergoing cardiopulmonary bypass surgeries, but also in the intervention of critical ill patients in the Intensive Care Units or during complex surgical procedures.
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.