4.8 Article

EdU sensing: The Raman way of following endothelial cell proliferation in vitro and ex vivo

期刊

BIOSENSORS & BIOELECTRONICS
卷 216, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2022.114624

关键词

Raman imaging; Click chemistry; Fluorescence imaging; Endothelium; Cell proliferation; Cycloheximide; Doxorubicin

资金

  1. European Union's Horizon

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study introduces a Raman-based imaging method using EdU as a probe to track endothelial cell proliferation, providing an alternative to fluorescence-based assays for assessing endothelial proliferation and regeneration.
Endothelial cells line the lumen of all vessels in the body and maintain vascular homeostasis. In particular, endothelial cell regeneration in response to insult sustain functional endothelial layer. EdU (5-ethynyl-2 '-deox-yuridine) is an alkyne-tagged proliferation probe that incorporates into newly synthesized DNA and is used for fluorescence imaging of cell proliferation with the use of click chemistry reaction with a fluorescent azide. Here, we utilized EdU as a click-free Raman probe for tracking endothelial cell proliferation. Raman imaging of EdU was performed in live endothelial cells, showing an advantage over fluorescence imaging of EdU, as this technique did not require sample fixation and permeabilization. To validate Raman-based imaging of EdU to study endothelial cell proliferation, we showed that when endothelial cells were treated with cycloheximide or doxorubicin to impair the proliferation of endothelial cells, the Raman-based signal of EdU was diminished. Furthermore, endothelial cells proliferation detected using EdU-labelled Raman imaging was compared with fluorescence imaging. Finally, the method of Raman-based EdU imaging was used in the isolated murine aorta ex vivo. Altogether, our results show that Raman-based imaging of EdU provides a novel alternative for fluorescence-based assay to assess endothelial proliferation and regeneration.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据