ArticleMethodsX2023
The influence of microinjection parameters on cell survival and procedure efficiency.
Article in MethodsX, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nanoparticle Applications in Plant Biotechnology: A Comprehensive Review.Plants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Label-free robotic mitochondrial biopsy.Science advances · 2025Article
- 3D nanoprinting of embryo microinjection needles with anti-clogging features.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microinjection is a method commonly used to deliver various substances into cells. The procedure is performed on a widefield microscope stage using fine glass needle to penetrate the cell membrane. Microinjection can be carried out using a manual or semi-automatic mode. For commercially available equipment currently reported microinjection success rate and cell viability are relatively low (around 50% for both indicators). Here, for the first time, we systematically show how the microinjection effectiveness and cell viability are influenced by needle diameter and chosen microinjection mode. We found that manual mode entailed a higher injection rate, reducing cell viability at the same time. The reduction in needle diameter caused a significant increase in cell survival rate (from 43 to 73% for manual mode and from 58% to 86% for semi-automatic mode) and did not affect significantly the success rate. Our findings will help optimize this method in the context of cell biology research.•This study shows how to improve microinjection parameters, such as procedure efficiency and cell survival rate, for commercially available equipment.•Manual mode, in comparison with semi-automatic mode, results in higher microinjection efficiency, but lower cell survival rate.•The increase in micropipette diameter causes lower cell viability and a higher microinjection success rate.
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.