ArticleBioelectrochemistry (Amsterdam, Netherlands)2026
Resolving nanosecond kinetics of the optical membrane potential in pulsed electric fields.
Article in Bioelectrochemistry (Amsterdam, Netherlands), 2026. 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.
- The Clausius-Mossotti Factor in Dielectrophoresis: A Critical Appraisal of Its Proposed Role as an 'Electrophysiology Rosetta Stone'.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Evaluating the electrical stimulation of bone cells based on an induced transmembrane potential model and intracellular calcium levels.Journal of tissue engineeringArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The primary bioeffect of pulsed electric fields (PEFs) is cell membrane charging, which determines a plethora of downstream events. While the kinetics of de- and hyperpolarization at the cathode- and anode-facing cell hemispheres should be the same, studies using pulsed laser strobe microscopy have reported asymmetrical charging in mammalian cells exposed to brief PEFs. To validate these anomalies, we measured charging kinetics with FluoVolt and Di-8-ANEPPS potentiometric dyes in spheroidal CHO cells exposed to 1-μs PEFs at 0-350 V/cm. Both dyes exhibited emission changes dependent on the electric field incidence angle, symmetrically at cathodic and anodic hemispheres. The changes scaled linearly with electric field strength up to at least 350 V/cm for Di-8-ANEPPS, but only to ∼200 V/cm for FluoVolt. Time constants measured from the optical membrane potential kinetics did not differ between the dyes, between cathodic and anodic cell poles, or between membrane charging and relaxation. The time constants followed the theoretical dependence on cell radius for 1.6 μF/cm
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.