ArticleScientific reports2015
Software-aided automatic laser optoporation and transfection of cells.
Article in Scientific reports, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficient electroporation in primary cells with PEDOT:PSS electrodes.Science advances · 2024Article
- An efficient low cost means of biophysical gene transfection in primary cells.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Laser-based molecular delivery and its applications in plant science.Plant methods · 2022Review
- Pulsed laser assisted high-throughput intracellular delivery in hanging drop based three dimensional cancer spheroids.The Analyst · 2021Article
- Review
- Intracellular Delivery by Membrane Disruption: Mechanisms, Strategies, and Concepts.Chemical reviews · 2018Review
- Frapid: achieving full automation of FRAP for chemical probe validation.Biomedical optics express · 2016Article
- Nanothermometry: From Microscopy to Thermal Treatments.Chemphyschem : a European journal of chemical physics and physical chemistry · 2016Review
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Optoporation, the permeabilization of a cell membrane by laser pulses, has emerged as a powerful non-invasive and highly efficient technique to induce transfection of cells. However, the usual tedious manual targeting of individual cells significantly limits the addressable cell number. To overcome this limitation, we present an experimental setup with custom-made software control, for computer-automated cell optoporation. The software evaluates the image contrast of cell contours, automatically designates cell locations for laser illumination, centres those locations in the laser focus, and executes the illumination. By software-controlled meandering of the sample stage, in principle all cells in a typical cell culture dish can be targeted without further user interaction. The automation allows for a significant increase in the number of treatable cells compared to a manual approach. For a laser illumination duration of 100 ms, 7-8 positions on different cells can be targeted every second inside the area of the microscope field of view. The experimental capabilities of the setup are illustrated in experiments with Chinese hamster ovary cells. Furthermore, the influence of laser power is discussed, with mention on post-treatment cell survival and optoporation-efficiency rates.
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.