MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1016/j.reprotox.2009.07.003

Медицинская библиотека · Reproductive toxicology (Elmsford, N.Y.) · 2009

An evaluation of the chick cardiomyocyte micromass system for identification of teratogens in a blind trial.

Hurst Helen, Clothier Richard H, Pratten Margaret

СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

The chick micromass culture system has advantages over the validated rat system - ready availability and non-culling of the donor parent - but needs to give comparable results. This study confirmed comparability and the ability to extend the system to cover cardiac effects. It was also compared with the validated embryonic stem cell cardiomyocyte model. A teratogen and paired non-teratogen with known in vivo effects were used. Differential effects were measured via changes in cell protein content, cell viability (resazurin reduction and neutral red uptake), and cell contractility. Results showed that teratogens [L-ethionine, 5-fluorouracil and sulphisoxazole] could be distinguished from non-teratogens [DL-methionine, 6-methyluracil and sulphanilamide respectively]. Dichloroacetone and dichloropropanol affected embryonic stem cells but not the micromass; dichloropropanol had a greater effect than dichloroacetone. This approach revealed differential effects on contractility independent of effects on activity/viability, whilst the total cell protein remained unchanged. We suggest that pre-validation of this system should be examined.

Для цитирования: Hurst Helen, Clothier Richard H, Pratten Margaret. An evaluation of the chick cardiomyocyte micromass system for identification of teratogens in a blind trial.. Reproductive toxicology (Elmsford, N.Y.). 2009. DOI: 10.1016/j.reprotox.2009.07.003.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.