Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31839906›Full record

ArticleJournal of extracellular vesicles2020

Quality and efficiency assessment of six extracellular vesicle isolation methods by nano-flow cytometry.

Ye Tian, Manfei Gong, Yunyun Hu, Haisheng Liu, Wenqiang Zhang, Miaomiao Zhang, Xiuxiu Hu, Dimitri Aubert, Shaobin Zhu, Lina Wu and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of extracellular vesicles, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 354 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
354citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

354 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

294 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors.

Ye TianMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Manfei GongMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Yunyun HuMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Haisheng LiuMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Wenqiang ZhangMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Miaomiao ZhangMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Xiuxiu HuMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Dimitri AubertNanoFCM Co., Ltd, Nottingham, UK.
Shaobin ZhuNanoFCM Inc., Xiamen Pioneering Park for Overseas Chinese Scholars, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Lina WuMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.
Xiaomei YanMOE Key Laboratory of Spectrochemical Analysis & Instrumentation, Key Laboratory for Chemical Biology of Fujian Province, Collaborative Innovation Center of Chemistry for Energy Materials, Department of Chemical Biology, College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Xiamen University, Xiamen, People's Republic of China.ORCID 0000-0002-7482-6863

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) have sparked tremendous interest owing to their prominent potential in diagnostics and therapeutics. Isolation of EVs from complex biological fluids with high purity is essential to the accurate analysis of EV cargo. Unfortunately, generally used isolation techniques do not offer good separation of EVs from non-EV contaminants. Hence, it is important to have a standardized method to characterise the properties of EV preparations, including size distribution, particle concentration, purity and phenotype. Employing a laboratory-built nano-flow cytometer (nFCM) that enables multiparameter analysis of single EVs as small as 40 nm, here we report a new benchmark to the quality and efficiency assessment of EVs isolated from plasma, one of the most difficult body fluids to work with. The performance of five widely used commercial isolation kits was examined and compared with the traditional differential ultracentrifugation (UC). Two to four orders of magnitude higher particle concentrations were observed for EV preparations from platelet-free plasma (PFP) by kits when compared with the EV preparation by UC, yet the purity was much lower. Meanwhile, the particle size distribution profiles of EV preparations by kits closely resembled those of PFP whereas the EV preparation by UC showed a broader size distribution at relatively large particle size. When these kits were used to isolate EVs from vesicle-depleted PFP (VD-PFP), comparable particle counts were obtained with their corresponding EV preparations from PFP, which confirmed again the isolation of a large quantity of non-vesicular contaminants. As CD9, CD63 and CD81 also exist in the plasma matrix, single-particle phenotyping of EVs offers distinct advantage in the validation of EVs compared with ensemble-averaged approaches, such as Western blot analysis. nFCM allows us to compare different isolation techniques without prejudice.

Indexed as

exosomesExtracellular vesiclesisolation methodsnano-flow cytometryplatelet free plasma

Identifiers

PMID31839906
PMCPMC6896440

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.