Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32179090›Full record

ArticleJournal of neuroscience methods2020

MicroCT optimisation for imaging fascicular anatomy in peripheral nerves.

Nicole Thompson, Enrico Ravagli, Svetlana Mastitskaya, Francesco Iacoviello, Kirill Aristovich, Justin Perkins, Paul R Shearing, David Holder

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of neuroscience methods, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed
4.1field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 51 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Computational modeling of autonomic nerve stimulation: Vagus et al.Current opinion in biomedical engineering · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Nicole ThompsonEIT and Neurophysiology Lab, Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom. Electronic address: nicole.thompson@ucl.ac.uk.
Enrico RavagliEIT and Neurophysiology Lab, Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
Svetlana MastitskayaEIT and Neurophysiology Lab, Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
Francesco IacovielloElectrochemical Innovation Lab, Chemical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
Kirill AristovichEIT and Neurophysiology Lab, Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
Justin PerkinsClinical Science and Services, The Royal Veterinary College, Hawkshead Lane, Hatfield, AL9 7TA, United Kingdom.
Paul R ShearingElectrochemical Innovation Lab, Chemical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
David HolderEIT and Neurophysiology Lab, Medical Physics and Biomedical Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, United Kingdom.
University College London · GBRoyal Veterinary College · GB

Funding

Medical Research Council MR/R01213X/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDue to the lack of understanding of the fascicular organisation, vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) leads to unwanted off-target effects. Micro-computed tomography (microCT) can be used to trace fascicles from periphery and image fascicular anatomy. NEW

methodIn this study, we present a simple and reproducible method for imaging fascicles in peripheral nerves with iodine staining and microCT for the determination of fascicular anatomy and organisation.

resultsAt the determined optimal pre-processing steps and scanning parameters, the microCT protocol allowed for segmentation and tracking of fascicles within the nerves. This was achieved after 24 hours and 120 hours of staining with Lugol's solution (1% total iodine) for rat sciatic and pig vagus nerves, respectively, and the following scanning parameters: 4 μm voxel size, 35 kVp energy, 114 μA current, 4 W power, 0.25 fps in 4 s exposure time, 3176 projections and a molybdenum target. COMPARISON WITH EXISTING METHOD(S): This optimised method for imaging fascicles provides high-resolution, three-dimensional images and full imaging penetration depth not obtainable with methods typically used such as histology, magnetic resonance imaging and optical coherence tomography whilst obviating time-consuming pre-processing methods, the amount of memory required, destruction of the samples and the cost associated with current microCT methods.

conclusionThe optimised microCT protocol facilitates segmentation and tracking of the fascicles within the nerve. The resulting segmentation map of the functional anatomical organisation of the vagus nerve will enable selective VNS ultimately allowing for the avoidance of the off-target effects and improving its therapeutic efficacy.

Indexed as

Peripheral NervesVagus Nerve StimulationAnimalsImaging, Three-DimensionalMagnetic Resonance ImagingRatsSwineX-Ray Microtomographyatomyautonomic nervescomputed tomographymicroCTneuroanneuroanatomical mappingperipheral nerves

Identifiers

PMID32179090
PMCPMC7181190
OpenAlexW3011886827

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.