ArticleCureus2022
Measuring the Compression Force Required for Vascular Shortening in Ultrasonic Vascular Models.
Article in Cureus, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Vascular compression is important for deep vein thrombosis screening. However, pressure analysis of ultrasound vessel models has not been performed. Therefore, we compared the human popliteal vein and several ultrasound vessel models at 50% compression. Methodology Four major ultrasound vascular models used in Japan and the popliteal vein of one subject constituted our measurement targets. Using a pressure-sensitive measuring device, the compressive force required to shorten the vessel diameter by 50% was determined. Results The compression force that shortened the popliteal vein by 50% was measured to be 191 ± 65 g. The blue phantom, ultrasound CV Pad II, ultrasound training block, and UGP-GEL required compression force of 701 ± 8 g, 265 ± 12 g, 697 ± 20 g, and 745 ± 15 g, respectively. The compression force for the ultrasound training block was 2.6 times higher than that for the ultrasound CV Pad II. The gel material around the vessels was the same; however, different vascular tubes required 2.6 times higher compression force. Conclusions This study showed that the objective numerical values of the compressive force were required to compress an ultrasound vascular model. Reproduction of the compressibility of veins required either removing the vascular structure or using thin tubing material.
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.