Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30530942›Full record

ArticlePhysiological measurement2019

Gauging electrical properties of bone with a bioimpedance-sensing drill.

Rebecca D Butler, Ryan J Halter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Physiological measurement, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review of Enhanced Handheld Surgical Drills.Critical reviews in biomedical engineering · 2023
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Bioimpedance Sensing Surgical Drill - Computational Modelling and Experimental Validation.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2020
    Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

2 authors.

Rebecca D ButlerThayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-2529-5971
Ryan J HalterThayer School of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH 03755, United States of America.

Funding

Smart Sensing Dental DrillR41DE024938 · NIDCR · RYTEK MEDICAL, INC. · PI HALTER, RYAN JOSEPH · 2015 to 2015
$225k
NIDCR NIH HHS R41 DE024938
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveMultiple surgical procedures require drilling through bone to access underlying anatomy or for device placement. In dental applications, iatrogenic injury caused by accidental perforation of cortical bone into critical anatomy occurs in a significant number of dental implant procedures. Limited real-time sensing methods are available to guide clinicians while drilling through cancellous bone towards cortical interfaces. Early interface detection could prevent accidental damage to underlying anatomic structures. This study aims to demonstrate that electrical impedance spectroscopy can be integrated within a standard surgical drill to distinguish between bone types. APPROACH: A custom bearing and insulated drill bit were designed to collect 10 cortical and cancellous impedance measurements from ex vivo femurs (2 pigs) and 80 bone measurements from in situ femurs (4 pigs). In the in situ study, two return electrodes (simulating a lip-clip and shoulder pad) were used to assess impedance differences associated with return electrode geometry. MAIN

resultsSignificant ex vivo differences (p  <  0.05) between cortical and cancellous bone occurred in the real resistivity from 0.1 to 100 kHz and in the imaginary resistivity from 0.3 to 10 kHz, with a maximum cortical-to-cancellous impedance ratio of 1.48. Significant in situ differences (p  <  0.01) were observed in both real and imaginary resistivities from 0.1 to 100 kHz, with a maximum impedance ratio of 2.94. AUCs for classifying bone type based on the real resistivity ranged from 0.84 to 0.96 for ex vivo bone and 0.98 to 1.0 for in situ bone. Mean differences between return electrode geometries were less than 5%. SIGNIFICANCE: The significant cortical-to-cancellous contrast observed indicates this system's potential to provide real-time tissue differentiation during bone drilling procedures.

Indexed as

Electric ImpedanceAnimalsFemurOrthopedic ProceduresSwine

Identifiers

PMID30530942
PMCPMC6752961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.