ArticleFrontiers in physiology2026
Fine-needle muscle microbiopsy: a feasible and well-tolerated alternative for skeletal muscle sampling.
Article in Frontiers in physiology, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Conventional muscle biopsy techniques, such as the Bergström method, require large tissue samples and skin incisions. Fine-needle muscle microbiopsy offers a minimally invasive alternative, but data on tolerability are lacking. We aimed to present a refined minimally-invasive muscle microbiopsy protocol using a 20-gauge needle with topical anaesthesia and compare perceived pain with routine venipuncture. Methods: Twenty-six healthy adults (50% female) underwent vastus lateralis microbiopsy using a 20-gauge needle (0.9 mm). Pain was assessed immediately after the microbiopsy and a venous blood draw using a 21-gauge needle, with the visual analogue scale (VAS). Procedures were randomized. Results: Seventy-eight microbiopsies were successfully obtained. Mean pain scores were low for both procedures (microbiopsy: 1.0 ± 0.9; venipuncture: 1.4 ± 1.2) with no significant difference (P = 0.311). Most participants reported minimal or low discomfort (VAS ≤3) from the microbiopsy. Conclusion: Fine-needle muscle microbiopsy using a 20-gauge needle is well tolerated, with pain comparable to routine venipuncture. This approach substantially reduces invasiveness compared to traditional biopsies while providing adequate material for proteomic analysis. These findings support its ethical and practical application in sensitive populations and longitudinal research.
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.