ArticleAnimal models and experimental medicine2025
An in vivo electrophysiological preparation for mechanical, electrical and optical stimulation of sensory neurons that innervate murine bone.
Article in Animal models and experimental medicine, 2025. 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.
- An in vivo electrophysiological preparation for mechanical, electrical and optical stimulation of sensory neurons that innervate murine bone.Animal models and experimental medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, we aimed to develop an in vivo electrophysiological bone-nerve preparation to record the activity of peripheral sensory neurons that innervate the murine tibia. A small nerve that innervates the tibial marrow cavity was identified in isoflurane-anesthetized C57BL/6 mice, and placed over a platinum hook electrode for extracellular recording. Whole-nerve activity was amplified, filtered and sampled at 20 kHz using PowerLab (ADInstruments). A cannula was placed into the marrow cavity to deliver mechanical stimuli (by pressurizing with injection of saline) and/or capsaicin. Optical stimulation was achieved by application of 473 nm blue light (1 Hz, 0.25-0.5 ms, 0-12.5 mW/mm) to the tibial marrow cavity in Wnt1-Cre; loxP-ChR2 mice. Murine bone afferent neurons responded to high threshold noxious mechanical stimulation, coded for the intensity of mechanical stimulation, could be sensitized by capsaicin, and did not suffer stimulus-evoked fatigue at 10-minute interstimulus intervals. Electrical and optical stimulation within the marrow cavity evoked action potentials with conduction velocities in the Aδ and/or C fiber range. These new approaches to recording the activity of bone afferent neurons will allow us to take advantage of transgenic and optogenetic tools to further our understanding of mechanisms that generate and maintain bone pain in the future.
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.