ArticleScientific reports2021
Development of a rat capnoperitoneum phantom to study drug aerosol deposition in the context of anticancer research on peritoneal carcinomatosis.
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 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): updated systematic review using the IDEAL framework.The British journal of surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Comparative Evaluation of Nozzle Designs for Enhanced Oxaliplatin Delivery in Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy: An In Vivo Study of a Porcine Model.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Performance of different nebulizers in clinical use for Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC).PloS one · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a promising approach with a high optimization potential for the treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis. To study the efficacy of PIPAC and drugs, first rodent cancer models were developed. But inefficient drug aerosol supply and knowledge gaps concerning spatial drug distribution can limit the results based on such models. To study drug aerosol supply/deposition, computed tomography scans of a rat capnoperitoneum were used to deduce a virtual and a physical phantom of the rat capnoperitoneum (RCP). RCP qualification was performed for a specific PIPAC method, where the capnoperitoneum is continuously purged by the drug aerosol. In this context, also in-silico analyses by computational fluid dynamic modelling were conducted on the virtual RCP. The physical RCP was used for ex-vivo granulometric analyses concerning drug deposition. Results of RCP qualification show that aerosol deposition in a continuous purged rat capnoperitoneum depends strongly on the position of the inlet and outlet port. Moreover, it could be shown that the droplet size and charge condition of the drug aerosol define the deposition efficiency. In summary, the developed virtual and physical RCP enables detailed in-silico and ex-vivo analyses on drug supply/deposition in rodents.
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.