Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20698578›Full record

ArticleAnalytical chemistry2010

Minimizing tissue damage in electroosmotic sampling.

Amy E Hamsher, Hongjuan Xu, Yifat Guy, Mats Sandberg, Stephen G Weber

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Analytical chemistry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Methods of Measuring Enzyme Activity Ex Vivo and In Vivo.Annual review of analytical chemistry (Palo Alto, Calif.) · 2018
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

5 authors.

Amy E HamsherDepartment of Chemistry, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA.
Hongjuan Xu
Yifat Guy
Mats Sandberg
Stephen G Weber

Funding

University of Pittsburgh Clinical and Translational Science InstituteUL1TR000005 · NCATS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI REIS, STEVEN E · 2012 to 2015
$50.8M
SENSITIVE AND SELECTIVE DETECTION OF PEPTIDESR01GM044842 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH AT PITTSBURGH · PI WEBER, STEPHEN G. · 1991 to 2018
$4.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR000005NIGMS NIH HHS GM044842NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM044842
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electroosmotic sampling is a potentially powerful method for pulling extracellular fluid into a fused-silica capillary in contact with the surface of tissue. An electric field is created in tissue by passing current through an electrolyte-filled capillary and then through the tissue. The resulting field acts on the counterions to the surface charges in the extracellular space to create electroosmotic fluid flow within the extracellular space of a tissue. Part of the development of this approach is to define conditions under which electroosmotic sampling minimizes damage to the tissue, in this case organotypic hippocampal slice cultures (OHSCs). We have assessed tissue damage by measuring fluorescence resulting from exposing sampled tissue to propidium iodide solution 16-24 h after sampling. Sampling has been carried out with a variety of capillary diameters, capillary tip-tissue distances, and applied voltages. Tissue damage is negligible when the power (current x potential drop) created in the tissue is less than 120 microW. In practical terms, smaller capillary i.d.s, lower voltages, and greater tissue to capillary distances lead to lower power.

Indexed as

AnimalsApoptosisCell DeathElectroosmosisHippocampusOrgan Culture TechniquesPropidiumRatsRats, Sprague-DawleySilicon DioxidePropidiumSilicon Dioxide

Identifiers

PMID20698578
PMCPMC2921186

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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 OpenQuestion graph.