ArticleRecent patents on biotechnology2025
Comparison of the Characteristics of Circulating Small Extracellular Vesicles Isolated by Ultracentrifugation and a Commercial Kit.
Article in Recent patents on biotechnology, 2025. 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.
- Exosomes in osteoporosis: regulatory mechanisms and clinical applications.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
introductionThe market offers a wide range of extracellular vesicles (EVs) isolation products, but their lack of standardization is a concern. Therefore, it is important to carefully assess the quality of the EVs obtained using these products to patent the ideal method. In this study, we compared the EXOCIB kit with the ultracentrifuge method, which is considered the gold standard for small EV isolation.
methodsAfter overnight fasting, small plasma EVs were extracted from four individuals using both the ultracentrifuge and the EXOCIB kit methods. The pooled EVs were then compared for the presence of the cluster of differentiation 63 (CD63) protein using the western blot analysis, and their size and zeta potential were performed by Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS). In addition, the size and morphology of small EVs were determined by using the Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) technique.
resultsAn average hydrodynamic size of 135.7 nm and a zeta potential of -6.33 Mv at 25°C was found for small EVs isolated by the ultracentrifuge, whereas the kit method resulted in small EVs with a hydrodynamic size of 102.8 nm and a zeta potential of -0.907. Notably, the size of the particles in the kit samples was smaller compared to those obtained through the ultracentrifuge (P < 0.001). The western blot method confirmed the expression of CD63 in both methods, so the ultracentrifuge yielded small EVs with a higher level of purity compared to the kit-based approach (P = 0.036).
conclusionThe DLS findings revealed the existence of vesicles within the appropriate size range for small EVs like exosomes in both isolation techniques. The results of the western blot analysis, in conjunction with DLS, displayed that the ultracentrifuge method extracted small EVs with a greater degree of purity than the kit-based approach.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39473100What 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.