ArticlePloS one2024
Probability and kinetics of rupture and electrofusion in giant unilamellar vesicles under various frequencies of direct current pulses.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Irreversible electroporation induces permanent permeabilization of lipid membranes of vesicles, resulting in vesicle rupture upon the application of a pulsed electric field. Electrofusion is a phenomenon wherein neighboring vesicles can be induced to fuse by exposing them to a pulsed electric field. We focus how the frequency of direct current (DC) pulses of electric field impacts rupture and electrofusion in cell-sized giant unilamellar vesicles (GUVs) prepared in a physiological buffer. The average time, probability, and kinetics of rupture and electrofusion in GUVs have been explored at frequency 500, 800, 1050, and 1250 Hz. The average time of rupture of many 'single GUVs' decreases with the increase in frequency, whereas electrofusion shows the opposite trend. At 500 Hz, the rupture probability stands at 0.45 ± 0.02, while the electrofusion probability is 0.71 ± 0.01. However, at 1250 Hz, the rupture probability increases to 0.69 ± 0.03, whereas the electrofusion probability decreases to 0.46 ± 0.03. Furthermore, when considering kinetics, at 500 Hz, the rate constant of rupture is (0.8 ± 0.1)×10-2 s-1, and the rate constant of fusion is (2.4 ± 0.1)×10-2 s-1. In contrast, at 1250 Hz, the rate constant of rupture is (2.3 ± 0.8)×10-2 s-1, and the rate constant of electrofusion is (1.0 ± 0.1)×10-2 s-1. These results are discussed by considering the electrical model of the lipid bilayer and the energy barrier of a prepore.
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.