ArticleJournal of microscopy2014
Compact non-contact total emission detection for in vivo multiphoton excitation microscopy.
Article in Journal of microscopy, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Modeling cardiac complexity: Advancements in myocardial models and analytical techniques for physiological investigation and therapeutic developmentAPL bioengineering · 2019Review
- Imaging in turbid media: a transmission detector gives 2-3 order of magnitude enhanced sensitivity compared to epi-detection schemes.Biomedical optics express · 2016Article
- A pragmatic guide to multiphoton microscope design.Advances in optics and photonics · 2015Article
- Motion compensation for in vivo subcellular optical microscopy.Journal of microscopy · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
We describe a compact, non-contact design for a total emission detection (c-TED) system for intra-vital multiphoton imaging. To conform to a standard upright two-photon microscope design, this system uses a parabolic mirror surrounding a standard microscope objective in concert with an optical path that does not interfere with normal microscope operation. The non-contact design of this device allows for maximal light collection without disrupting the physiology of the specimen being examined. Tests were conducted on exposed tissues in live animals to examine the emission collection enhancement of the c-TED device compared to heavily optimized objective-based emission collection. The best light collection enhancement was seen from murine fat (5×-2× gains as a function of depth), whereas murine skeletal muscle and rat kidney showed gains of over two and just under twofold near the surface, respectively. Gains decreased with imaging depth (particularly in the kidney). Zebrafish imaging on a reflective substrate showed close to a twofold gain throughout the entire volume of an intact embryo (approximately 150 μm deep). Direct measurement of bleaching rates confirmed that the lower laser powers, enabled by greater light collection efficiency, yielded reduced photobleaching in vivo. The potential benefits of increased light collection in terms of speed of imaging and reduced photo-damage, as well as the applicability of this device to other multiphoton imaging methods is discussed.
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.