ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2023
Effects of focused ultrasound in a "clean" mouse model of ultrasonic neuromodulation.
Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2023. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent studies on ultrasonic neuromodulation (UNM) in rodents have shown that focused ultrasound (FUS) can activate peripheral auditory pathways, leading to off-target and brain-wide excitation, which obscures the direct activation of the target area by FUS. To address this issue, we developed a new mouse model, the double transgenic Pou4f3+/DTR × Thy1-GCaMP6s, which allows for inducible deafening using diphtheria toxin and minimizes off-target effects of UNM while allowing effects on neural activity to be visualized with fluorescent calcium imaging. Using this model, we found that the auditory confounds caused by FUS can be significantly reduced or eliminated within a certain pressure range. At higher pressures, FUS can result in focal fluorescence dips at the target, elicit non-auditory sensory confounds, and damage tissue, leading to spreading depolarization. Under the acoustic conditions we tested, we did not observe direct calcium responses in the mouse cortex. Our findings provide a cleaner animal model for UNM and sonogenetics research, establish a parameter range within which off-target effects are confidently avoided, and reveal the non-auditory side effects of higher-pressure stimulation.
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.