ArticleUltramicroscopy2022
Chemical and cryo-collection of muscle samples for transmission electron microscopy using Methacarn and dimethyl sulfoxide
Article in Ultramicroscopy, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Muscle samples are commonly chemically fixed or frozen immediately upon collection for biochemical and morphological analysis. Certain fixatives such as glutaraldehyde and osmium tetroxide are widely used for transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and lead to adequate preservation of muscle ultrastructure, but do not preserve the molecular features of samples. Methacarn is suggested to be a preferable chemical fixative for light microscopy because it maintains immunohistological features of samples. However, the efficacy of methacarn to preserve ultrastructural features as a primary chemical fixative for TEM is currently unclear. Additionally, cryo-preservation of samples for TEM analysis involves freezing processes such as plunge freezing, slam freezing, or high pressure freezing. High pressure freezing is the considered the gold standard but requires costly equipment and may not be a viable option for many labs collecting tissue samples from remote locations. Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) is a commonly used cryoprotectant that may allow for better structural preservation of samples by impairing ice damage that occurs during plunge/snap freezing. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of methacarn as a primary chemical fixative and determine the effect of pre-coating samples with DMSO before plunge/snap freezing tissues to be prepared for TEM. The micrographs of the methcarn-fixed samples indicate a loss of Z-disk integrity, intermyofibrillar space, mitochondria structure, and lipids. Ultimately, methacarn is not a viable primary fixative for tissue sample preparation for TEM. Similarly, liquid nitrogen freezing of samples wrapped in aluminum foil produced non-uniform Z-disk alignments that appeared smeared with swollen mitochondria. DMSO coating before freezing appears to lessen the alterations to contractile and mitochondrial morphological structures. DMSO appears to be useful for preserving the ultrastructure of sarcomeres if samples are covered before freezing.
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.