ArticleF&S science2020
Photoacoustic laser effects in live mouse blastocysts: pilot safety studies of DNA damage from photoacoustic imaging doses.
Article in F&S science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ionic-resolution protoacoustic microscopy: A feasibility study.Applied physics letters · 2024Article
- Photoacoustic tomography reconstruction using lag-based delay multiply and sum with a coherence factor improves in vivo ovarian cancer diagnosis.Biomedical optics express · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo investigate the laser safety of photoacoustic imaging. In photoacoustic imaging, a pulsed laser of several nanoseconds is used to illuminate biological tissue, and photoacoustic waves generated by optical absorption are used to form images of the tissue. Photoacoustic imaging is emerging in clinical applications; however, its potential use in reproductive medicine has yet to be reported.
designAssessment of photoacoustic laser safety before its adoption by clinical reproductive medicine.
settingAcademic medical center. ANIMALS: Blastocyst-stage mouse embryos.
interventionsPotential DNA damage of photoacoustic laser exposure on preimplantation mouse blastocyst stage embryos was examined. Different embryos groups were exposed to either 5- or 10-minute 15-Hz laser doses (typical clinical doses) and 1-minute 1-kHz laser dose (significantly higher dose), respectively.
main outcome measuresA terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick end labeling (TUNEL) assay was used to identify the rate of DNA damage in the laser-exposed blastocysts.
resultsThe negative control blastocyst group (no laser exposure) had a mean of 10.7 TUNEL-positive nuclei. The 5- and 10-minute 15-Hz laser-exposed groups had a mean of 11.25 and 12.89 TUNEL-positive nuclei, respectively. The embryos exposed to the 1-kHz laser for 1 minute had an average mean of 12.0 TUNEL-positive nuclei.
conclusionWe demonstrated that typical lasers and exposure times used for photoacoustic imaging do not induce increased cell death in mouse blastocysts.
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.