Abstract
evaluation. The area at risk (AR) was assessed either by Evans blue or by fluorescent microspheres (FMic). IS was expressed as percentage of AR not uptaking TTC. Stem cell engraftment was evaluated at 30 days by immunohistochemistry. Results: Calculation of infarcted area resulted easier, faster and more reliable when using the FMic compared with Evans blue. In many samples, the dye permeated into the tissue colouring the heart in blue and resulting in a difficult identification of non-ischemic area. At the contrary, delimitation of the AR was easier and reproducible when using FMic. Histology showed high quality Hematoxylin&Eosin and α-sarcomeric actin only in hearts injected with FMic. At two days, both tracking methods were reliable. At day 30, cells labelled with the V-CM-Dil were promptly identified, while the GFP signal was dim even when the fluorescence was amplified using anti-GFP antibodies. Conclusions: Our study provides evidences suggesting that the use of FMic represents a better alternative compared with Evans blue for AR/IS quantification. We also demonstrated that lipophilic dyes seem to work better than GFP for cell tracking.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
