ArticleInternational journal of ophthalmology2013
Comparison of two methods used to culture and purify rat retinal Müller cells.
Article in International journal of ophthalmology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Eurycomanone fromJournal of clinical biochemistry and nutrition · 2024Article
- Article
- Olfactory Ensheathing Cells Inhibit Gliosis in Retinal Degeneration by Downregulation of the Müller Cell Notch Signaling Pathway.Cell transplantation · 2017Article
- Promotion on the differentiation of retinal Müller cells into retinal ganglion cells by Brn-3b.International journal of ophthalmology · 2016Article
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo study two methods for culturing and purifying Sprague-Dawley (SD) rat retinal Müller cells and determine which one is better.
methodsThe passage culture method of Müller cells was respectively carried out by complete pancreatic enzyme digestion method and repeated incomplete pancreatic enzyme digestion method. After culturing retinal cells for one month through these two methods, fluorescence-activated cell sorter (FACS), RT-PCR, and immunohistochemistry technology were performed to examine the enrichment and purity of Müller glial cells, and carried out two-sample approximate t test using SSPS 13.0 to further compare the Müller cell positive rate in both methods.
resultsThe statistical results showed that the purity of Müller cells was 83.2%±5.16% in group A, and the purity was 98.5%±1.08% in group B. The two-sample approximate t test analysis demonstrated that the difference between group A and group B was statistically significant (t=-9.178, P<0.005). The results clearly exhibited a difference between the purity of Müller cells cultured by the complete pancreatic enzyme digestion method (group A) and the repeated incomplete pancreatic enzyme digestion method (group B).
conclusionCompared with the complete pancreatic enzyme digestion method, this novel method was more efficient and a higher purity of Müller cells could be obtained using this approach.
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.