ArticleScientific reports2021
Dynamic mechanical interaction between injection liquid and human tissue simulant induced by needle-free injection of a highly focused microjet.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 39 citations in OpenAlex.
- Rheology-driven penetration dynamics of needle-free jet injection in ex vivo porcine tissue.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026Article
- Development of Repetitive Mechanical Oscillation Needle-Free Injection through Electrically Induced Microbubbles.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 2025Article
- Revealing physical interactions of ultrasound waves with the body through photoelasticity imaging.Optics and lasers in engineering · 2024Article
- Predicting buoyant jet characteristics: a machine learning approach.Chemical product and process modeling · 2024Article
- Dynamic interaction of injected liquid jet with skin layer interfaces revealed by microsecond imaging of optically cleared ex vivo skin tissue model.Journal of biological engineering · 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
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study investigated the fluid-tissue interaction of needle-free injection by evaluating the dynamics of the cavity induced in body-tissue simulant and the resulting unsteady mechanical stress field. Temporal evolution of cavity shape, stress intensity field, and stress vector field during the injection of a conventional injection needle, a proposed highly focused microjet (tip diameter much smaller than capillary nozzle), and a typical non-focused microjet in gelatin were measured using a state-of-the-art high-speed polarization camera, at a frame rate up to 25,000 f.p.s. During the needle injection performed by an experienced nurse, high stress intensity lasted for an order of seconds (from beginning of needle penetration until end of withdrawal), which is much longer than the order of milliseconds during needle-free injections, causing more damage to the body tissue. The cavity induced by focused microjet resembled a funnel which had a narrow tip that penetrated deep into tissue simulant, exerting shear stress in low intensity which diffused through shear stress wave. Whereas the cavity induced by non-focused microjet rebounded elastically (quickly expanded into a sphere and shrank into a small cavity which remained), exerting compressive stress on tissue simulant in high stress intensity. By comparing the distribution of stress intensity, tip shape of the focused microjet contributed to a better performance than non-focused microjet with its ability to penetrate deep while only inducing stress at lower intensity. Dynamic mechanical interaction revealed in this research uncovered the importance of the jet shape for the development of minimally invasive medical devices.
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.