ArticleVeterinary world2020
A novel
Article in Veterinary world, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Gelatin-Based Ingestible Impedance Sensor to Evaluate Gastrointestinal Epithelial Barriers.Advanced materials (Deerfield Beach, Fla.) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe aim of the study was to set up a porcine MATERIALS AND
methodsThirteen esophagi, collected at a slaughterhouse, were ablated of their sphincters, pinned upright on a support, and placed in a thermostatic hood at 37°C with two infusion tubes and an MII-pH probe inserted in the top end. Three esophagi (histology controls) were only left in the hood for 3.5 h before sampling, while the remaining organs underwent the experimental protocol including saline infusion and recovery recording, and acid solution infusion and recovery recording.
resultsMII-pH analysis highlighted a significantly stronger decrease during acid infusion when compared to saline, but a better post-infusion recovery for saline solution. At the end of the protocol, MII was still statistically lower than baseline. The acid-damaged esophagi significantly absorbed more EB dye, and histology revealed strong mucosal exfoliation.
conclusionThe proposed model of esophageal acid damage seems to be repeatable, reliable, and achievable using organs collected at the slaughterhouse. MII recording proved to have good sensitivity in detecting mucosal alterations also in
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.