4.7 Review

Critical Review of the Evolution of Extracellular Vesicles' Knowledge: From 1946 to Today

Journal

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22126417

Keywords

exosomes; microvesicles; multivesicular bodies; liposomes

Funding

  1. University of Padova [BIRD194033, BIRD199551/19]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are a family of particles/vesicles found in blood and body fluids, playing important roles in cell communication and regulation of cell processes. Recent years have seen increased interest in the content and function of EVs, but this has also led to confusion in their classification and naming. This review analyzes the evolution of knowledge and definition of EVs over the years.
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) are a family of particles/vesicles present in blood and body fluids, composed of phospholipid bilayers that carry a variety of molecules that can mediate cell communication, modulating crucial cell processes such as homeostasis, induction/dampening of inflammation, and promotion of repair. Their existence, initially suspected in 1946 and confirmed in 1967, spurred a sharp increase in the number of scientific publications. Paradoxically, the increasing interest for EV content and function progressively reduced the relevance for a precise nomenclature in classifying EVs, therefore leading to a confusing scientific production. The aim of this review was to analyze the evolution of the progress in the knowledge and definition of EVs over the years, with an overview of the methodologies used for the identification of the vesicles, their cell of origin, and the detection of their cargo. The MISEV 2018 guidelines for the proper recognition nomenclature and ways to study EVs are summarized. The review finishes with a more questions than answers chapter, in which some of the problems we still face to fully understand the EV function and potential as a diagnostic and therapeutic tool are analyzed.

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