» Articles » PMID: 17444611

Effect of Cell Size and Shape on Single-cell Electroporation

Overview
Journal Anal Chem
Specialty Chemistry
Date 2007 Apr 21
PMID 17444611
Citations 34
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Single-cell electroporation was performed using electrolyte-filled capillaries on fluorescently labeled A549 cells. Cells were exposed to brief pulses (50-300 ms) at various cell-capillary tip distances. Cell viability and electroporation success were measured. In order to understand the variability in single-cell electroporation, logistic regression was used to determine whether the probabilities of cell survival and electroporation depend on experimental conditions and cell properties. Both experimental conditions and cell properties (size and shape) have a significant effect on the outcome. Finite element simulations were used to compare bulk electroporation to single-cell electroporation in terms of cell size and shape. Cells are more readily permeabilized and are more likely to survive if they are large and hemispherical as opposed to small and ellipsoidal with a high aspect ratio. The dependence of the maximum transmembrane potential across the cell membrane on cell size is much weaker than it is for bulk electroporation. Observed survival probabilities are related to the calculated fraction of the cell's surface area that is electroporated. Observed success of electroporation is related to the maximum transmembrane potential achieved.

Citing Articles

The need for smart microalgal bioprospecting.

Labara Tirado J, Herdean A, Ralph P Nat Prod Bioprospect. 2025; 15(1):7.

PMID: 39815030 PMC: 11735771. DOI: 10.1007/s13659-024-00487-3.


Novel electroporation microchip with field constriction enhances transfection efficiency and survival rates of feline embryos.

Kallayanathum W, Techaumnat B, Panklang N, Sripumkhai W, Jeamsaksiri W, Koo O Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):29508.

PMID: 39604472 PMC: 11603018. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-80494-z.


Involvement of Mitochondria in the Selective Response to Microsecond Pulsed Electric Fields on Healthy and Cancer Stem Cells in the Brain.

Casciati A, Taddei A, Rampazzo E, Persano L, Viola G, Cani A Int J Mol Sci. 2024; 25(4).

PMID: 38396911 PMC: 10889160. DOI: 10.3390/ijms25042233.


The Emerging Landscape for Combating Resistance Associated with Energy-Based Therapies via Nanomedicine.

Hu Q, Zuo H, Hsu J, Zeng C, Tian Z, Sun Z Adv Mater. 2023; 36(5):e2308286.

PMID: 37971203 PMC: 10872442. DOI: 10.1002/adma.202308286.


Human cardiomyocytes are more susceptible to irreversible electroporation by pulsed electric field than human esophageal cells.

Casciola M, Keck D, Feaster T, Blinova K Physiol Rep. 2022; 10(20):e15493.

PMID: 36301726 PMC: 9612150. DOI: 10.14814/phy2.15493.


References
1.
Khine M, Lau A, Ionescu-Zanetti C, Seo J, Lee L . A single cell electroporation chip. Lab Chip. 2004; 5(1):38-43. DOI: 10.1039/b408352k. View

2.
Wheeler A, Throndset W, Whelan R, Leach A, Zare R, Liao Y . Microfluidic device for single-cell analysis. Anal Chem. 2003; 75(14):3581-6. DOI: 10.1021/ac0340758. View

3.
Xia F, Jin W, Yin X, Fang Z . Single-cell analysis by electrochemical detection with a microfluidic device. J Chromatogr A. 2005; 1063(1-2):227-33. DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2004.12.022. View

4.
Kagan V, Kuzmenko A, Tyurina Y, Shvedova A, Matsura T, Yalowich J . Pro-oxidant and antioxidant mechanisms of etoposide in HL-60 cells: role of myeloperoxidase. Cancer Res. 2001; 61(21):7777-84. View

5.
Valic B, Golzio M, Pavlin M, Schatz A, Faurie C, Gabriel B . Effect of electric field induced transmembrane potential on spheroidal cells: theory and experiment. Eur Biophys J. 2003; 32(6):519-28. DOI: 10.1007/s00249-003-0296-9. View