ArticleAnnals of biomedical engineering2021
Efficacy of Body Armor in Protection Against Blast Injuries Using a Swine Model in a Confined Space with a Blast Tube.
Article in Annals of biomedical engineering, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Blast injury simulation in pigs using an air-driven shock wave generator: effects of shock waves of lateral shock wave exposure.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2026Article
- Numerical Study of Human Torso Mechanical Response and Injury Assessment Under Blast Loading with Bulletproof Protection.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Primary Blast-Induced Traumatic Brain Injury as a Risk Factor for (Cerebro)vascular Disorder: Clinical Manifestations, Blast Physics, Biomechanics, Pathobiology, and Critical Gaps.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Sex-based effects of shock energy exposure in warfighters.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of Body Armor Against Shock Waves: Preventing Blast Injury in a Confined Space.Cureus · 2024Article
- The cause of acute lethality of mice exposed to a laser-induced shock wave to the brainstem.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- A New Anthropomorphic Mannequin for Efficacy Evaluation of Thoracic Protective Equipment Against Blast Threats.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
13 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to clarify whether or not body armor would protect the body of a swine model using a blast tube built at National Defense Medical College, which is the first such blast tube in Japan. Seventeen pigs were divided into two groups: the body armor group and the non-body armor group. Under intravenous anesthesia, the pigs were tightly fixed in the left lateral position on a table and exposed from the back neck to the upper lumbar back to the blast wave and wind with or without body armor, with the driving pressure of the blast tube set to 3.0 MPa. When the surviving and dead pigs were compared, blood gas analyses revealed significant differences in PaO2, PaCO2, and pH in the super-early phase. All pigs injured by the blast wave and wind had lung hemorrhage. All 6 animals in the body armor group and 6 of the 11 animals in the control group survived for 3 hours after injury. Respiratory arrest immediately after exposure to the blast wave was considered to influence the mortality in our pig model. Body armor may have a beneficial effect in protecting against respiratory arrest immediately after an explosion.
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.