Evidence mapPaperPMID 26023786Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Performance comparison of ultrasound-based methods to assess aortic diameter and stiffness in normal and aneurysmal mice.

Bram Trachet, Rodrigo A Fraga-Silva, Francisco J Londono, Abigaïl Swillens, Nikolaos Stergiopulos, Patrick Segers

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Cardiac and respiratory-gated volumetric murine ultrasound.The international journal of cardiovascular imaging · 2018
    Article
  11. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Bram TrachetIBiTech-bioMMeda, Ghent University-IMinds Medical IT, Ghent, Belgium; Institute of Bioengineering, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Rodrigo A Fraga-SilvaInstitute of Bioengineering, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Francisco J LondonoIBiTech-bioMMeda, Ghent University-IMinds Medical IT, Ghent, Belgium.
Abigaïl SwillensIBiTech-bioMMeda, Ghent University-IMinds Medical IT, Ghent, Belgium.
Nikolaos StergiopulosInstitute of Bioengineering, Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Patrick SegersIBiTech-bioMMeda, Ghent University-IMinds Medical IT, Ghent, Belgium.
École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne · CHGhent University · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSeveral ultrasound-based methods are currently used to assess aortic diameter, circumferential strain and stiffness in mice, but none of them is flawless and a gold standard is lacking. We aimed to assess the validity and sensitivity of these methods in control animals and animals developing dissecting abdominal aortic aneurysm. METHODS AND

resultsWe first compared systolic and diastolic diameters as well as local circumferential strains obtained in 47 Angiotensin II-infused ApoE(-/-) mice with three different techniques (BMode, short axis MMode, long axis MMode), at two different abdominal aortic locations (supraceliac and paravisceral), and at three different time points of abdominal aneurysm formation (baseline, 14 days and 28 days). We found that short axis BMode was preferred to assess diameters, but should be avoided for strains. Short axis MMode gave good results for diameters but high standard deviations for strains. Long axis MMode should be avoided for diameters, and was comparable to short axis MMode for strains. We then compared pulse wave velocity measurements using global, ultrasound-based transit time or regional, pressure-based transit time in 10 control and 20 angiotensin II-infused, anti-TGF-Beta injected C57BL/6 mice. Both transit-time methods poorly correlated and were not able to detect a significant difference in PWV between controls and aneurysms. However, a combination of invasive pressure and MMode diameter, based on radio-frequency data, detected a highly significant difference in local aortic stiffness between controls and aneurysms, with low standard deviation.

conclusionsIn small animal ultrasound the short axis view is preferred over the long axis view to measure aortic diameters, local methods are preferred over transit-time methods to measure aortic stiffness, invasive pressure-diameter data are preferred over non-invasive strains to measure local aortic stiffness, and the use of radiofrequency data improves the accuracy of diameter, strain as well as stiffness measurements.

Indexed as

Vascular StiffnessAngiotensin IIAnimalsAntibodiesAortaAortic AneurysmMaleMiceMice, KnockoutTransforming Growth Factor betaUltrasonographyAngiotensin IIAntibodiesTransforming Growth Factor beta

Identifiers

PMID26023786
PMCPMC4449181
OpenAlexW1881117159

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 Socratic graph.