ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2014
Feasibility study of red blood cell debulking by magnetic field-flow fractionation with step-programmed flow.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sickle cell vaso-occlusive episodes correlate with the magnetic heterogeneity of red blood cells.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Continuous, intrinsic magnetic depletion of erythrocytes from whole blood with a quadrupole magnet and annular flow channel; pilot scale study.Biotechnology and bioengineering · 2018Article
- Femtogram Resolution of Iron Content on a Per Cell Basis: Ex Vivo Storage of Human Red Blood Cells Leads to Loss of Hemoglobin.Analytical chemistry · 2017Article
- Working principle and application of magnetic separation for biomedical diagnostic at high- and low-field gradients.Interface focus · 2016Review
- The potential for liquid biopsies in the precision medical treatment of breast cancer.Cancer biology & medicine · 2016Article
- Fundamentals and application of magnetic particles in cell isolation and enrichment: a review.Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society (Great Britain) · 2015Review
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 at 5 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Emerging applications of rare cell separation and analysis, such as separation of mature red blood cells from hematopoietic cell cultures, require efficient methods of red blood cell (RBC) debulking. We have tested the feasibility of magnetic RBC separation as an alternative to centrifugal separation using an approach based on the mechanism of magnetic field-flow fractionation (MgFFF). A specially designed permanent magnet assembly generated a quadrupole field having a maximum field of 1.68 T at the magnet pole tips, zero field at the aperture axis, and a nearly constant radial field gradient of 1.75 T/mm (with a negligible angular component) inside a cylindrical aperture of 1.9 mm (diameter) and 76 mm (length). The cell samples included high-spin hemoglobin RBCs obtained by chemical conversion of hemoglobin to methemoglobin (met RBC) or by exposure to anoxic conditions (deoxy RBC), low-spin hemoglobin obtained by exposure of RBC suspension to ambient air (oxy RBC), and mixtures of deoxy RBC and cells from a KG-1a white blood cell (WBC) line. The observation that met RBCs did not elute from the channel at the lower flow rate of 0.05 mL/min applied for 15 min but quickly eluted at the subsequent higher flow rate of 2.0 mL/min was in agreement with FFF theory. The well-defined experimental conditions (precise field and flow characteristics) and a well-established FFF theory verified by studies with model cell systems provided us with a strong basis for making predictions about potential practical applications of the magnetic RBC separation.
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.