Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35689270›Full record

ArticleSkeletal muscle2022

The Myotube Analyzer: how to assess myogenic features in muscle stem cells.

Simon Noë, Marlies Corvelyn, Sarah Willems, Domiziana Costamagna, Jean-Marie Aerts, Anja Van Campenhout, Kaat Desloovere

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Skeletal muscle, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

22 citing papers in PubMed, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Generation of MatureBio-protocol · 2024
    Article
  20. Alcalase-AssistedMarine drugs · 2023
    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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Simon NoëResearch Group for Neurorehabilitation (eNRGy), Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. simon.noe@student.kuleuven.be.
Marlies CorvelynTranslational Cardiomyology, Stem Cell and Developmental Biology Unit, Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Sarah WillemsTranslational Cardiomyology, Stem Cell and Developmental Biology Unit, Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Domiziana CostamagnaResearch Group for Neurorehabilitation (eNRGy), Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Jean-Marie AertsM3-BIORES, Division Animal and Human Health Engineering, Department of Biosystems, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Anja Van CampenhoutDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
Kaat DesloovereResearch Group for Neurorehabilitation (eNRGy), Department of Rehabilitation Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
KU Leuven · BE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe analysis of in vitro cultures of human adult muscle stem cells obtained from biopsies delineates the potential of skeletal muscles and may help to understand altered muscle morphology in patients. In these analyses, the fusion index is a commonly used quantitative metric to assess the myogenic potency of the muscle stem cells. Since the fusion index only partly describes myogenic potency, we developed the Myotube Analyzer tool, which combines the definition of the fusion index with extra features of myonuclei and myotubes obtained from satellite cell cultures.

resultsThe software contains image adjustment and mask editing functions for preprocessing and semi-automatic segmentation, while other functions can be used to determine the features of nuclei and myotubes. The fusion index and a set of five novel parameters were tested for reliability and validity in a comparison between satellite cell cultures from children with cerebral palsy and typically developing children. These novel parameters quantified extra nucleus and myotube properties and can be used to describe nucleus clustering and myotube shape. Two analyzers who were trained in cell culture defined all parameters using the Myotube Analyzer app. Out of the six parameters, five had good reliability reflected by good intra-class correlation coefficients (> 0.75). Children with cerebral palsy were significantly different from the typically developing children (p < 0.05) for five parameters, and for three of the six parameters, these differences exceeded the minimal detectable differences.

conclusionsThe Myotube Analyzer can be used for the analysis of fixed differentiated myoblast cultures with nuclear and MyHC staining. The app can calculate the fusion index, an already existing parameter, but also provides multiple new parameters to comprehensively describe myogenic potential in its output. The raw data used to determine these parameters are also available in the output. The parameters calculated by the tool can be used to detect differences between cultures from children with cerebral palsy and typically developing children. Since the program is open source, users can customize it to fit their own analysis requirements.

Indexed as

Cerebral PalsyAdultCell DifferentiationCells, CulturedChildHumansMuscle Fibers, SkeletalMuscle, SkeletalMyoblastsReproducibility of ResultsCerebral palsyFusion indexImage analysisSatellite cell cultures

Identifiers

PMID35689270
PMCPMC9185954
OpenAlexW4281660141

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.