Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32528952›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in cell and developmental biology2020

Analysis of Neat Biofluids Obtained During Cardiac Surgery Using Nanoparticle Tracking Analysis: Methodological Considerations.

Andrew I U Shearn, Sezin Aday, Soumaya Ben-Aicha, Pauline Carnell-Morris, Agnieszka Siupa, Gianni D Angelini, Aled Clayton, Chantal Boulanger, Prakash Punjabi, Costanza Emanueli and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in cell and developmental biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
–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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Reply to: Letter to Editor by Saravanan Sampoornam et al.Journal of cellular and molecular medicine · 2025
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
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.

Andrew I U ShearnBristol Heart Institute, Bristol Royal Infirmary, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Sezin AdayBristol Heart Institute, Bristol Royal Infirmary, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Soumaya Ben-AichaNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Pauline Carnell-MorrisMalvern Instruments Ltd., Malvern, United Kingdom.
Agnieszka SiupaMalvern Instruments Ltd., Malvern, United Kingdom.
Gianni D AngeliniBristol Heart Institute, Bristol Royal Infirmary, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Aled ClaytonSchool of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, United Kingdom.
Chantal BoulangerCardiovascular Research Center, INSERM U970, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France.
Prakash PunjabiNational Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Costanza EmanueliBristol Heart Institute, Bristol Royal Infirmary, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.
Giovanni BiglinoBristol Heart Institute, Bristol Royal Infirmary, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom.

Funding

British Heart Foundation CH/1992027/7163British Heart Foundation RG/20/9/35101
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Small extracellular vesicles (sEVs) are those nanovesicles 30-150 nm in size with a role in cell signalling and potential as biomarkers of disease. Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) techniques are commonly used to measure sEV concentration in biofluids. However, this quantification technique can be susceptible to sample handing and machine settings. Moreover, some classes of lipoproteins are of similar sizes and could therefore confound sEV quantification, particularly in blood-derived preparations, such serum and plasma. Here we have provided methodological information on NTA measurements and systematically investigated potential factors that could interfere with the reliability and repeatability of results obtained when looking at neat biofluids (i.e., human serum and pericardial fluid) obtained from patients undergoing cardiac surgery and from healthy controls. Data suggest that variables that can affect vesicle quantification include the level of contamination from lipoproteins, number of sample freeze/thaw cycles, sample filtration, using saline-based diluents, video length and keeping the number of particles per frame within defined limits. Those parameters that are of less concern include focus, the "Maximum Jump" setting and the number of videos recorded. However, if these settings are clearly inappropriate the results obtained will be spurious. Similarly, good experimental practice suggests that multiple videos should be recorded. In conclusion, NTA is a perfectible, but still commonly used system for sEVs analyses. Provided users handle their samples with a highly robust and consistent protocol, and accurately report these aspects, they can obtain data that could potentially translate into new clinical biomarkers for diagnosis and monitoring of cardiovascular disease.

Indexed as

cardiac surgeryexosomal biomarkersexosome (vesicle)nanopartciclesNTA (nanoparticle tracking analysis)

Identifiers

PMID32528952
PMCPMC7262431

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.