ArticleScientific reports2026
Hybrid modeling of electroporation and impedance spectroscopy for label free characterization of stem cells.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Label-free, non-destructive characterization of stem-cell differentiation states remains an important goal in regenerative medicine and cell therapy. Existing computational frameworks commonly treat electroporation either at the tissue scale or for simplified single-cell geometries, and relatively few studies connect time-domain electroporation observables with swept-frequency impedance features measured in a microfluidic platform. This study presents a revised hybrid analytical-numerical and experimental framework for comparing undifferentiated human mesenchymal stem cells (hMSCs) with osteogenic-committed hMSCs. The numerical models are parameterized using the cell-type values : an undifferentiated hMSC model with representative radius [Formula: see text], cytoplasmic conductivity [Formula: see text], membrane capacitance [Formula: see text], and characteristic electroporation voltage [Formula: see text]; and an osteogenic hMSC model with [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text], and [Formula: see text]. Both models are placed in the same microfluidic electrode environment and excited by electric-field pulses ([Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text], rise time 1 ns). The passive Schwan RC time constants are [Formula: see text] for undifferentiated hMSCs and [Formula: see text] for osteogenic hMSCs; the plotted post-threshold rise times are shorter, on the order of [Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text]. The passive polar transmembrane potentials at [Formula: see text] are approximately [Formula: see text] and 9.75 V, respectively. Swept-frequency impedance spectroscopy ([Formula: see text] to [Formula: see text]) performed on undifferentiated and osteogenic-committed hMSCs provides the matched frequency-domain comparison: low-frequency impedance, series resistance, reactance trough depth, phase angle, and voltage-dependent impedance drop are extracted at applied voltages of 1, 5, 10, 15, 20, and 25 V. The experimental data show that osteogenic hMSCs have higher baseline impedance ([Formula: see text] vs. [Formula: see text] at [Formula: see text], [Formula: see text]), whereas undifferentiated hMSCs exhibit the stronger high-voltage impedance drop at [Formula: see text] approximately (92.4 % compared with 86.9 % for osteogenic hMSCs). Calibrated 10.4 [Formula: see text]m and 24.9 [Formula: see text]m polystyrene microbeads are included as cell-free size standards for the impedance workflow. The combined results define a cell-type feature space [Formula: see text] for future label-free classification studies. The present work should be interpreted as a matched modelling and impedance-analysis framework; definitive biological classification, direct pore imaging, viability validation, and trained classifier performance remain outside the scope of this study.
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.