ArticlePulse (Basel, Switzerland)
The MAASWERP Study: An International, Comparative Case Study on Measuring Biomechanics of the Aged Murine Aorta.
Article in Pulse (Basel, Switzerland). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The MAASWERP Study: An International, Comparative Case Study on Measuring Biomechanics of the Aged Murine Aorta.Pulse (Basel, Switzerland)Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Arterial stiffening is a hallmark of vascular ageing, and unravelling its underlying mechanisms has become a central theme in the field of cardiovascular disease. While various techniques and experimental setups are accessible for investigating biomechanics of blood vessels both in vivo and ex vivo, comparing findings across diverse methodologies is challenging. Methods: Arterial stiffness in the aorta of adult (5 months) and aged (24 months) wild-type C57Bl/6J mice was measured in vivo, after which ex vivo biomechanical evaluation was performed using the Rodent Oscillatory Tension Setup to study Arterial Compliance (ROTSAC; University of Antwerp, Belgium) and the DynamX setup (Maastricht University, The Netherlands). Stiffness of aortic tissue was measured in both absence and presence of activated smooth muscle cells (i.e., contraction). Measurements in both setups were conducted in parallel with matched protocols and identical buffers and chemicals. Results: Overall, both methods revealed age-related increased aortic stiffness, although parameters of aortic mechanics showed different numerical values, suggesting that results are not directly interchangeable between methods. Surprisingly, smooth muscle cell contraction had opposing effects between the setups. Indeed, smooth muscle cell contraction increased arterial stiffness in the ROTSAC but decreased stiffness in the DynamX. These opposing effects could be attributed to how the two setups differentially load the collagen fibres in the arterial wall, ex vivo. Conclusion: Overall, this study provided critical insights into how different experimental setups can influence the interpretation of aortic biomechanics, emphasizing the need for careful consideration and contextualization of results based on the methodology used.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.