Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24287643›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2013

Cell electrofusion using nanosecond electric pulses.

Lea Rems, Marko Ušaj, Maša Kandušer, Matej Reberšek, Damijan Miklavčič, Gorazd Pucihar

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing 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

51 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Biophysical Considerations in Cell Fusion.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  6. Microfluidic Electroporation: Recent Advances and Applications.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. The design and engineering of synthetic genomes.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2025
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Developing Advanced Chimeric Cell Therapy for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

6 authors.

Lea Rems1] University of Ljubljana, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Tržaška cesta 25, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia [2].
Marko Ušaj
Maša Kandušer
Matej Reberšek
Damijan Miklavčič
Gorazd Pucihar

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Electrofusion is an efficient method for fusing cells using short-duration high-voltage electric pulses. However, electrofusion yields are very low when fusion partner cells differ considerably in their size, since the extent of electroporation (consequently membrane fusogenic state) with conventionally used microsecond pulses depends proportionally on the cell radius. We here propose a new and innovative approach to fuse cells with shorter, nanosecond (ns) pulses. Using numerical calculations we demonstrate that ns pulses can induce selective electroporation of the contact areas between cells (i.e. the target areas), regardless of the cell size. We then confirm experimentally on B16-F1 and CHO cell lines that electrofusion of cells with either equal or different size by using ns pulses is indeed feasible. Based on our results we expect that ns pulses can improve fusion yields in electrofusion of cells with different size, such as myeloma cells and B lymphocytes in hybridoma technology.

Indexed as

AnimalsCell FusionCell SizeCHO CellsCricetulusElectricityElectroporationHybridomasMelanoma, ExperimentalMicePulse

Identifiers

PMID24287643
PMCPMC3843160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.