| Literature DB >> 17125510 |
Saurabh V Gandhi1, Dawn C Walker, Brian H Brown, Dilly O C Anumba.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We sought to compare uterine cervical electrical impedance spectroscopy measurements employing two probes of different sizes, and to employ a finite element model to predict and compare the fraction of electrical current derived from subepithelial stromal tissue.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2006 PMID: 17125510 PMCID: PMC1684260 DOI: 10.1186/1475-925X-5-62
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Mean (SD) cervical impedance data in Ωm obtained from 12 subjects, 5 mm vs. 9 mm tetrapolar measuring probe.
| Mean cervical impedance over the frequency range 4–819 kHz (Ωm) | 5.4 (1.6) | 2.8 (0.8) | < 0.001 |
| Mean (95% CI) difference in resistivity values obtained by single observer taking two measurements 1–2 minutes apart. | 0.03(-0.8, 0.9) | -0.18 (-1.1, 0.7) | 0.69 |
Figure 1Mean (SD) impedance spectral data obtained in 12 subjects using the 5 and the 9 mm probe over frequency range 4–819 kHz (p < 0.001).
Figure 2FE model predicted spectral data using the 5 and the 9 mm probe.
Figure 3FE model prediction of stromal contribution to cervical impedance for 5 and 9 mm probes, shown as fraction of injected current flowing through cervical tissue stroma.