ArticlePloS one2017
A rapid, efficient, and economic device and method for the isolation and purification of mouse islet cells.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- CD99-targeted immunomagnetic negative selection: A novel strategy for high-purity pancreatic islet isolation in murine models.PloS one · 2026Article
- Comparative Study of The Effects of Confounding Factors on Improving Rat Pancreatic Islet Isolation Yield and Quality.Cell journal · 2022Article
- A Practical Guide to Rodent Islet Isolation and Assessment Revisited.Biological procedures online · 2021Review
- Engineering Strategies to Improve Islet Transplantation for Type 1 Diabetes Therapy.ACS biomaterials science & engineering · 2020Article
- Exosomes derived from human mesenchymal stem cells preserve mouse islet survival and insulin secretion function.EXCLI journal · 2020Article
- A modified method for isolating human quiescent pancreatic stellate cells.Cancer management and research · 2019Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Rapid, efficient, and economic method for the isolation and purification of islets has been pursued by numerous islet-related researchers. In this study, we compared the advantages and disadvantages of our developed patented method with those of commonly used conventional methods (Ficoll-400, 1077, and handpicking methods). Cell viability was assayed using Trypan blue, cell purity and yield were assayed using diphenylthiocarbazone, and islet function was assayed using acridine orange/ethidium bromide staining and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay-glucose stimulation testing 4 days after cultivation. The results showed that our islet isolation and purification method required 12 ± 3 min, which was significantly shorter than the time required in Ficoll-400, 1077, and HPU groups (34 ± 3, 41 ± 4, and 30 ± 4 min, respectively; P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in islet viability among the four groups. The islet purity, function, yield, and cost of our method were superior to those of the Ficoll-400 and 1077 methods, but inferior to the handpicking method. However, the handpicking method may cause wrist injury and visual impairment in researchers during large-scale islet isolation (>1000 islets). In summary, the MCT method is a rapid, efficient, and economic method for isolating and purifying murine islet cell clumps. This method overcomes some of the shortcomings of conventional methods, showing a relatively higher quality and yield of islets within a shorter duration at a lower cost. Therefore, the current method provides researchers with an alternative option for islet isolation and should be widely generalized.
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.