Abstract
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) were initially characterized as "garbage bags" with the purpose of removing unwanted material from cells. It is now becoming clear that EVs mediate intercellular communication between distant cells through a transfer of genetic material, a process important to the systemic adaptation in physiological and pathological conditions. Although speculative, it has been suggested that the majority of EVs that make it into the bloodstream would be coming from skeletal muscle, since it is one of the largest organs in the human body. Although it is well established that skeletal muscle secretes peptides (currently known as myokines) into the bloodstream, the notion that skeletal muscle releases EVs is in its infancy. Besides intercellular communication and systemic adaptation, EV release could represent the mechanism by which muscle adapts to certain stimuli. This review summarizes the current understanding of EV biology and biogenesis and current isolation methods and briefly discusses the possible role EVs have in regulating skeletal muscle mass.
Highlights
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) were first observed more than 50 years ago when Peter Wolf detected the presence of minute particulate material in plasma, which was described as “platelet dust” [90]
It has been well established that virtually all cells in the body release distinct types of vesicles that are conserved throughout evolution, from bacteria to humans
These vesicles have received heterogeneous classifications, and, despite the debatable nomenclature that has circulated within the scientific community, it has currently adopted the term “EVs.” based on the new position statement of the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles [80], if physical characteristics, such as size or density, are assessed the term “small EVs” (Ͻ150 nm) or “medium/ large EVs” (Ͼ200 nm) is preferable
Summary
Extracellular vesicles (EVs) were first observed more than 50 years ago when Peter Wolf detected the presence of minute particulate material in plasma, which was described as “platelet dust” [90]. Many different methods have been described; each has its own specific advantages and disadvantages, which, depending on the methodology used, can differentially affect the properties of the isolated vesicles greatly [85] This is caused in part by each technique exploiting a particular feature of EVs in the isolation process, such as density, shape, size, and surface proteins. In an attempt to standardize the ongoing studies in the EV field, the International Society for Extracellular Vesicles has proposed the use of at least three different methods of EV analysis and a description in detail of the methodology used for the isolation procedures [51, 89] Among those methods, there are optical (fluorescence-activated cell sorter, dynamic light scattering, nanoparticle tracking analysis, etc.) and nonoptical (transmission electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy, etc.) approaches to analyze EV size and morphology. Markers for different cell types are currently unknown; high selectivity and cost; nonspecific binding
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
