4.7 Article

Optimization of methods for the accurate characterization of whole blood neutrophils

Journal

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-07455-2

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [R01 DK108353, R01 HL129878, R01 HD083026]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study investigates the effects of various methods for neutrophil characterization on neutrophil activation and degranulation levels. By comparing different methods, it is found that staining whole blood at low temperature and removing unbound antibodies prior to fixation and red blood cell lysis can minimize neutrophil activation, thus improving the consistency and reproducibility of neutrophil characterization.
Neutrophils are the most abundant circulating leukocyte population with critical roles in immune defense, regulation of innate and adaptive immune systems, and disease pathogenesis. Our progress in understanding precise mechanisms of neutrophil activation, recruitment, and function has been hampered by the lack of optimized and standardized methods for the characterization and phenotyping of this readily activated population. By comparing eight methods of neutrophil characterization, we demonstrate that the level of neutrophil activation and degranulation is associated with specific experimental conditions and the number and type of manipulation steps employed. Staining whole blood at 4 degrees C and removal of remaining unbound antibodies prior to one-step fixation and red blood cell lysis minimizes neutrophil activation, decreases phenotypic alterations during processing, and prevents nonspecific antibody binding. The effects of anticoagulants used for collection, processing delays, and time and temperature during sample analysis on neutrophil phenotype are addressed. The presented data provide a foundation for higher quality standards of neutrophil characterization improving consistency and reproducibility among studies.

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