Comparison between direct and reverse electroporation of cells in situ: a simulation study.

Details

Ressource 1Download: 27009275_BIB_139223D678E3.pdf (1191.56 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: Final published version
License: Not specified
Serval ID
serval:BIB_139223D678E3
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Comparison between direct and reverse electroporation of cells in situ: a simulation study.
Journal
Physiological Reports
Author(s)
Towhidi L., Khodadadi D., Maimari N., Pedrigi R.M., Ip H., Kis Z., Kwak B.R., Petrova T.W., Delorenzi M., Krams R.
ISSN
2051-817X (Electronic)
ISSN-L
2051-817X
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2016
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
4
Number
6
Pages
e12673
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
The discovery of the human genome has unveiled new fields of genomics, transcriptomics, and proteomics, which has produced paradigm shifts on how to study disease mechanisms, wherein a current central focus is the understanding of how gene signatures and gene networks interact within cells. These gene function studies require manipulating genes either through activation or inhibition, which can be achieved by temporarily permeabilizing the cell membrane through transfection to delivercDNAorRNAi. An efficient transfection technique is electroporation, which applies an optimized electric pulse to permeabilize the cells of interest. When the molecules are applied on top of seeded cells, it is called "direct" transfection and when the nucleic acids are printed on the substrate and the cells are seeded on top of them, it is termed "reverse" transfection. Direct transfection has been successfully applied in previous studies, whereas reverse transfection has recently gained more attention in the context of high-throughput experiments. Despite the emerging importance, studies comparing the efficiency of the two methods are lacking. In this study, a model for electroporation of cells in situ is developed to address this deficiency. The results indicate that reverse transfection is less efficient than direct transfection. However, the model also predicts that by increasing the concentration of deliverable molecules by a factor of 2 or increasing the applied voltage by 20%, reverse transfection can be approximately as efficient as direct transfection.
Pubmed
Open Access
Yes
Create date
09/04/2016 15:32
Last modification date
22/08/2019 8:32
Usage data