ArticleScientific reports2026
A novel AI-coupled flow chamber method quantifying erythrocyte osmotic fragility.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Beyond macrocirculatory targets: a multimodal framework for microcirculatory and organ perfusion monitoring in sepsis.Critical care (London, England) · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Osmotic fragility (OF) is widely used to evaluate red blood cell (RBC) membrane stability, water transport dynamics and hemoglobinopathies, traditionally via spectrophotometric, visual, or flow cytometric techniques. Here, we present a novel flow chamber-based platform integrated with a proprietary imaging software providing AI-driven RBC detection for automated and reproducible OF analysis (BioExP). To assess agreement, we compared MCF₅₀ values from four healthy donors using classical and flow chamber methods. Protocol optimization included determining the "satiation time" (optimal incubation required to induce maximal hemolysis without overexposure) and hemolysis kinetics. Biological sensitivity was tested using two modulators: HgCl₂ (40 µM) to inhibit aquaporin (AQP) channels and lipopolysaccharide (LPS, 1000 µg/mL) to increase membrane fragility. Both treatments caused significant shifts in MCF₅₀ when compared to control: AQP inhibition decreased MCF₅₀ to 0.37 ± 0.01% NaCl (flow chamber) and 0.40 ± 0.01% NaCl (classical), while LPS increased MCF₅₀ to 0.44 ± 0.01% NaCl and 0.47 ± 0.004% NaCl, respectively (p < 0.001 for all). The BioExP replicated classical OF measurements, captured donor-specific variability, and detected changes. Importantly, it demonstrated that LPS alone, in plasma-free conditions, can compromise RBC membrane integrity. The platform requires minimal sample volume and enables real-time imaging and multi-condition testing.
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.