ArticlePloS one2013
A new and reliable guide for studies of neuronal loss based on focal lesions and combinations of in vivo and in vitro approaches.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Biomaterial Surface Properties on Engineering Neural Tissue for Spinal Cord Regeneration.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- VDAC1 regulates neuronal cell loss after retinal trauma injury by a mitochondria-independent pathway.Cell death & disease · 2022Article
- CRISPR, Prime Editing, Optogenetics, and DREADDs: New Therapeutic Approaches Provided by Emerging Technologies in the Treatment of Spinal Cord Injury.Molecular neurobiology · 2020Review
- VDAC1 is essential for neurite maintenance and the inhibition of its oligomerization protects spinal cord from demyelination and facilitates locomotor function recovery after spinal cord injury.Scientific reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issuedde Sousa, Erica [corrected to Sousa, Erica]
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In this study, we describe a simple and reliable method to study neuroprotective effects in living and organized neural tissue. This method, which was based on retinal explants for in vivo focal lesions, was conceived as a collection of modular procedures, which can be customized for particular demands. With this model, it is possible to combine immunohistochemistry with image data analysis to track the two- or three-dimensional redistribution of proteins as a time/space function of primary cell loss. At the same time, it is possible to finely control the exposure of the tissue to specific drugs and molecules. In order to illustrate the use of the proposed method, we tested the effects of two different nanotube compounds on retinal explant viability. Transcriptome analyses can be separately performed in the lesion focus and penumbra with laser capture microdissection followed by polymerase chain reaction analyses. In addition, other common experimental drawbacks, such as high individual variance, are eliminated. With intraocular injections, treatments can be verified in vivo, with one eye serving as the experimental tissue and the other serving as the control tissue. In summary, we describe a flexible and easy method, which can be useful in combination with a broad variety of recently developed neuroprotective strategies, to study neurodegeneration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.