ArticlePflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology1993
Functional properties of mechanosensitive units from the chicken ureter in vitro.
Article in Pflugers Archiv : European journal of physiology, 1993. 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, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Purinergic signalling in the urinary tract in health and disease.Purinergic signalling · 2014Review
- Visceral pain: the neurophysiological mechanism.Handbook of experimental pharmacology · 2009Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A total of 66 mechanosensitive units was recorded from an in vitro preparation of the chicken ureter with attached nerves. They were classified into three groups according to their functional properties. U-1 units (30% of the units) responded to contractions of the ureter and exhibited very low spontaneous activity (mean: 0.1 Hz). They had low average thresholds to distension (5.8 mmHg or 0.77 kPa), responded immediately to mechanical stimuli without exhibiting after discharges to strong stimuli. Their function might be the monitoring of peristalsis. U-2 units (38%) did not respond to contractions and had irregular spontaneous activities (mean: 0.7 Hz). They exhibited a high average activation threshold to distension (42.6 mmHg or 5.73 kPa) and after discharges to strong mechanical stimuli. U-2 units might be involved in nociception. U-G units (32%) were characterized by their long-latency response to any mechanical stimulus used and had a regular high ongoing activity (mean: 2.2 Hz). The pressure thresholds cover the whole range of the U-1 and U-2 units (5 to 70 mmHg or 0.67-9.33 kPa) with an average of 31.5 mmHg or 4.2 kPa. The peak discharge to pressure stimuli occurred much later than in the U-1 and U-2 units and they exhibited pronounced after discharges. Some U-G units were inhibited by mechanical stimuli. U-G units had large receptive fields sometimes covering the entire ureter. The units responded to electrical stimulation of the ureter after a variable latency, indicating that they were synaptically driven. In addition, a late long-lasting response to electrical stimulation was observed.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
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.