ArticleJournal of biomedical optics2024
Comparison of polystyrene and hydrogel microcarriers for optical imaging of adherent cells.
Article in Journal of biomedical optics, 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
Significance: The ability to observe and monitor cell density and morphology has been imperative for assessing the health of a cell culture and for producing high quality, high yield cell cultures for decades. Microcarrier-based cultures, used for large-scale cellular expansion processes, are not compatible with traditional visualization-based methods, such as widefield microscopy, due to their thickness and material composition. Aim: Here, we assess the optical imaging compatibilities of commercial polystyrene microcarriers versus custom-fabricated gelatin methacryloyl (gelMA) microcarriers for non-destructive and non-invasive visualization of the entire microcarrier surface, direct cell enumeration, and sub-cellular visualization of mesenchymal stem/stromal cells. Approach: Mie scattering and wavefront error simulations of the polystyrene and gelMA microcarriers were performed to assess the potential for elastic scattering-based imaging of adherent cells. A Zeiss Z.1 light-sheet microscope was adapted to perform light-sheet tomography using label-free elastic scattering contrast from planar side illumination to achieve optical sectioning and permit non-invasive and non-destructive, Results: The polystyrene microcarrier prevents visualization of cells on the distal half of the microcarrier using either fluorescence or elastic scattering contrast, whereas the gelMA microcarrier allows for high fidelity visualization of cell morphology and quantification of cell density using light-sheet fluorescence microscopy and tomography. Conclusions: The combination of optical-quality gelMA microcarriers and label-free light-sheet tomography will facilitate enhanced control of bioreactor-microcarrier cell culture processes.
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.