ArticleFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology2024
Storage-induced mechanical changes of porcine lenses assessed with optical coherence elastography and inverse finite element modeling.
Article in Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology, 2024. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: In an effort of gaining a better understanding of the lens mechanics, Methods: A total of 81 freshly enucleated porcine eyes were obtained and divided into six groups and preserved differently. In the first three groups, the lens within the intact eye was preserved for 24 h by: (i) freezing at -80°C (n = 12), (ii) freezing at -20°C (n = 12), and (iii) refrigeration at +8°C (n = 12). In the remaining groups, the lenses were immediately extracted and treated as follows: (iv) kept intact, no storage (n = 12), (v) decapsulated, no storage (n = 21), and (vi) immersed in Minimum Essential Medium (MEM) at +8°C (n = 12) for 24 h. Frozen lenses were thawed at room temperature. Each lens was compressed between two glass lamella and subjected, first to a period of relaxation during which the compression force was recorded and second to an oscillating micro-compression while the deformation was recorded with a total of 256 subsequent B-scans via optical coherence tomography. The corresponding axial strain was retrieved via phase-sensitive image processing and subsequently used as input for an inverse finite element analysis (iFEA) to retrieve the visco-hyperelastic material properties of the lenses. Results: After freezing at temperatures of -80°C and -20°C, the cortical strains increased by 14% ( Discussion: Combining iFEA with optical coherence elastography allowed us to identify important changes in the lens mechanics induced after different preserving
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.