| Title |
Assessing the axonal translocation of CeO2 and SiO2 nanoparticles in the sciatic nerve fibers of the frog: an ex vivo electrophysiological study
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s93663 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Georgia Kastrinaki, Christos Samsouris, Efstratios K Kosmidis, Eleni Papaioannou, Athanasios G Konstandopoulos, George Theophilidis |
| Abstract |
The axonal translocation of two commonly used nanoparticles in medicine, namely CeO2 and SiO2, is investigated. The study was conducted on frog sciatic nerve fibers in an ex vivo preparation. Nanoparticles were applied at the proximal end of the excised nerve. A nerve stimulation protocol was followed for over 35 hours. Nerve vitality curve comparison between control and exposed nerves showed that CeO2 has no neurotoxic effect at the concentrations tested. After exposure, specimens were fixed and then screen scanned every 1 mm along their length for nanoparticle presence by means of Fourier transform infrared microscopy. We demonstrated that both nanoparticles translocate within the nerve by formation of narrow bands in the Fourier transform infrared spectrum. For the CeO2, we also demonstrated that the translocation depends on both axonal integrity and electrical activity. The speed of translocation for the two species was estimated in the range of 0.45-0.58 mm/h, close to slow axonal transportation rate. Transmission electron microscopy provided direct evidence for the presence of SiO2 in the treated nerves. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 15 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 25% |
| Researcher | 3 | 19% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 13% |
| Professor | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 19% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 25% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 4 | 25% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 13% |
| Engineering | 2 | 13% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 November 2015.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,470
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#176,405
of 294,812 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#93
of 112 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 294,812 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 112 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.