ArticleBioengineering (Basel, Switzerland)2024
Comparison of the Biomechanical Properties between Healthy and Whole Human and Porcine Stomachs.
Article in Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sodium Alginate-Based Submucosal Lifting Hydrogel for Endoscopic Mucosal Resection and Endoscopic Submucosal Dissection.Advanced healthcare materials · 2026Article
- Uniform and Complete Irreversible Electroporation on Gastric Mucosa Enabled by Sintered Silver Hydrogel.Cyborg and bionic systems (Washington, D.C.) · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Gastric cancer poses a societal and economic burden, prompting an exploration into the development of materials suitable for gastric reconstruction. However, there is a dearth of studies on the mechanical properties of porcine and human stomachs. Therefore, this study was conducted to elucidate their mechanical properties, focusing on interspecies correlations. Stress relaxation and tensile tests assessed the hyperelastic and viscoelastic characteristics of porcine and human stomachs. The thickness, stress-strain curve, elastic modulus, and stress relaxation were assessed. Porcine stomachs were significantly thicker than human stomachs. The stiffness contrast between porcine and human stomachs was evident. Porcine stomachs demonstrated varying elastic modulus values, with the highest in the longitudinal mucosa layer of the corpus and the lowest in the longitudinal intact layer of the fundus. In human stomachs, the elastic modulus of the longitudinal muscular layer of the antrum was the highest, whereas that of the circumferential muscularis layer of the corpus was the lowest. The degree of stress relaxation was higher in human stomachs than in porcine stomachs. This study comprehensively elucidated the differences between porcine and human stomachs attributable to variations across different regions and tissue layers, providing essential biomechanical support for subsequent studies in this field.
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.