ArticleActa biomaterialia2025
Ex-vivo mechano-structural characterization of fresh diseased human esophagus.
Article in Acta biomaterialia, 2025. 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
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The esophagus, the tube-like organ responsible for transporting food from the pharynx to the stomach, operates as a highly mechanical structure, exhibiting complex contraction and distension patterns triggered by neurological impulses. Despite the critical role of mechanics in its function and the need for high-fidelity models of esophageal transport, mechanical characterization studies of human esophagus remain relatively scarce. In addition to the paucity of studies in human specimens, the available results are often scattered in terms of methodology and scope, making it difficult to compare findings across studies and thereby limiting their use in computational models. In this work, we present a detailed passive-mechanical and structural characterization of the esophageal muscular layers, excised from short esophageal segments obtained from live patients with varied clinical presentations. Specifically, we conducted uniaxial and planar biaxial extension tests on the smooth muscle layers, complemented by pre- and post-testing structural characterization via histological imaging. Unlike existing studies, our experimental results on passive behavior are discussed in the context of physiological relevance (e.g., physiological stretches, and activity-inhibiting pathologies), providing valuable insights that guide the subsequent modeling of the esophagus' mechanical response. As such, this work provides new insights into the passive properties of the fresh human esophagus, expands the existing database of mechanical parameters for computational modeling, and lays the foundation for future studies on active mechanical properties. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Understanding the mechanical properties of the esophagus is crucial for developing accurate models of its function and suitable replacements. This study provides insights into the passive mechanical behavior of fresh human esophageal tissue, enhancing our understanding of how it responds to stretching under physiological conditions. By characterizing the properties of different esophageal layers, obtained from esophagectomy specimens with various presentations, and considering their relevance to both normal and abnormal functioning, this work addresses the gap in ex-vivo human esophagus studies. The findings emphasize the importance of contextually analyzing experimental results within physiological parameters and suggest avenues for future research to further refine our understanding of esophageal mechanics, paving the way for improved diagnostic and therapeutic approaches in managing esophageal disorders.
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.