4.7 Article

A Simplified Method to Recover Urinary Vesicles for Clinical Applications, and Sample Banking

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 4, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/srep07532

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Irish Health Research Board HRB [HRA/09/62]
  2. European Union funded programs Urosense [IAAP-GA-2011-286386]
  3. KidneyConnect [602422]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urinary extracellular vesicles provide a novel source for valuable biomarkers for kidney and urogenital diseases: Current isolation protocols include laborious, sequential centrifugation steps which hampers their widespread research and clinical use. Furthermore, large individual urine sample volumes or sizable target cohorts are to be processed (e.g. for biobanking), the storage capacity is an additional problem. Thus, alternative methods are necessary to overcome such limitations. We have developed a practical vesicle isolation technique to yield easily manageable sample volumes in an exceptionally cost efficient way to facilitate their full utilization in less privileged environments and maximize the benefit of biobanking. Urinary vesicles were isolated by hydrostatic dialysis with minimal interference of soluble proteins or vesicle loss. Large volumes of urine were concentrated up to 1/100 of original volume and the dialysis step allowed equalization of urine physico-chemical characteristics. Vesicle fractions were found suitable to any applications, including RNA analysis. In the yield, our hydrostatic filtration dialysis system outperforms the conventional ultracentrifugation-based methods and the labour intensive and potentially hazardous step of ultracentrifugations are eliminated. Likewise, the need for trained laboratory personnel and heavy initial investment is avoided. Thus, our method qualifies as a method for laboratories working with urinary vesicles and biobanking.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available