ArticleAnnals of translational medicine2021
Protective effect of ultrasound microbubble combined with gross saponins of
Article in Annals of translational medicine, 2021. 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, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Long-Term Intraocular Pressure-Lowering and Antifibrotic Effects of a Biodegradable HA-Mg Glaucoma Drainage Implant in a Chronic Glaucoma Rabbit Model.Translational vision science & technology · 2026Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo investigate the protective effect of ultrasound microbubble combined with gross saponins of
methodsRabbits were randomly divided into five groups. Normal (Group A), high intraocular pressure (IOP, Group B), GSTT (Group C), GSTT + ultrasound (Group D), and GSTT + ultrasound + microbubble destruction (Group E). The high intraocular pressure eye (model eye) was compared to the normal eye (control eye) at 1, 2, and 4 weeks after model establishment. Rabbits were sacrificed 4 weeks later to measure the retina thickness using Cirrus OCT, slit lamp photograph, and fundus photography. The retina and optic nerve of rabbits in each group were collected and the stretched retina were prepared for retinal ganglion cell (RGC) counting, the optic nerve axon was measured, and a transmission electron microscopy was used.
resultsRetina thickness based on Cirrus OCT: mean retinal thickness in Group E was significantly greater than that in Group B, but still thinner than that in Group A. RGCs counts: RGCs counts in Group E were significantly higher than those in Groups B, C, and D but still lower than those in Group A. Quantitative analysis of optic nerve axons: In Group E, the number of optic nerves was increased, diameters of optic nerve axons were decreased, the percentage of optic nerve area occupied by axons was increased, and there were statistically significant differences compared to Groups B, C, and D. Content of GSTT in retina: The content of GSTT in Group E was significantly higher than that in other groups. Observation of the rabbit optic nerves: In Group E, the structure of the myelin sheath of the optic nerve was still intact but less ordered, and the microtubule and microfilament structures in the axons were clear.
conclusionsCombination of the ultrasound microbubble and GSTT can improve the protective effect of GSTT on optic nerve damage in rabbits with ocular hypertension.
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.