ArticlePeerJ2015
Profile analysis of hepatic porcine and murine brain tissue slices obtained with a vibratome.
Article in PeerJ, 2015. 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.
- Precision-cut tumor slices: a biomimetic tool for accelerating oncological development from basic research to clinical translation.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Culture of vibrating microtome tissue slices as a 3D model in biomedical research.Journal of biological engineering · 2023Review
- Chemical warfare agent research in precision-cut tissue slices-a useful alternative approach.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2020Review
- Optimization of Organotypic Cultures of Mouse Spleen for Staining and Functional Assays.Frontiers in immunology · 2020Article
- Radiation Treatment of Organotypic Cultures from Submandibular and Parotid Salivary Glands Models Key In Vivo Characteristics.Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE · 2019Article
- Clarifying CLARITY: Quantitative Optimization of the Diffusion Based Delipidation Protocol for Genetically Labeled Tissue.Frontiers in neuroscience · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study is aimed at characterizing soft tissue slices using a vibratome. In particular, the effect of two sectioning parameters (i.e., step size and sectioning speed) on resultant slice thickness was investigated for fresh porcine liver as well as for paraformaldehyde-fixed (PFA-fixed) and fresh murine brain. A simple framework for embedding, sectioning and imaging the slices was established to derive their thickness, which was evaluated through a purposely developed graphical user interface. Sectioning speed and step size had little effect on the thickness of fresh liver slices. Conversely, the thickness of PFA-fixed murine brain slices was found to be dependent on the step size, but not on the sectioning speed. In view of these results, fresh brain tissue was sliced varying the step size only, which was found to have a significant effect on resultant slice thickness. Although precision-cut slices (i.e., with regular thickness) were obtained for all the tissues, slice accuracy (defined as the match between the nominal step size chosen and the actual slice thickness obtained) was found to increase with tissue stiffness from fresh liver to PFA-fixed brain. This quantitative investigation can be very helpful for establishing the most suitable slicing setup for a given tissue.
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.