An overview of the most common methods for assessing cell viability

M. Shokrzadeh, Mona Modanloo
{"title":"An overview of the most common methods for assessing cell viability","authors":"M. Shokrzadeh, Mona Modanloo","doi":"10.24896/JRMDS.V5I2.278","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Measuring the proliferation and survival of cells is very important when studying the influence of various substances on cells. In this respect, several methods have been standardized to assess cell viability. These assays include common methods such as Trypan blue colorimetric method rather than the more complex ones such as MTT or XTT. Each of these methods has some merits and demerits compared to others.  Some factors such as cost, speed, sensitivity and the required equipment are involved in selecting the suitable procedure. Despite the simplicity and cost-effectiveness of cell morphology evaluation, the sensitivity of this method is not very high and it is not adequate for short-term effects of materials. Trypan blue method is a common practice in the assessment of cell viability due to damage to cell membrane. This method, like other methods depends on the integrity of the membrane (Lactate Dehydrogenase release and fluorescent assays), is ineffective where there is cell damage without membrane damage. Despite being highly accurate, cologenic, fluorescent and flow cytometry assays are expensive and laborious. MTT assay as a simple, robust, rapid and cost-effective method is able to simultaneously evaluate a large number of samples. XTT assay is newer and more sensitive than MTT method. But contrary to MTT, it is not suitable for all kinds of cells. Generally, MTT assay is widely used as a reliable method. The current study aims to provide an overview of the most common methods used to evaluate cell viability and also weigh up the pros and cons of each method.","PeriodicalId":17001,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science","volume":"5 1","pages":"33-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24896/JRMDS.V5I2.278","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 12

Abstract

Measuring the proliferation and survival of cells is very important when studying the influence of various substances on cells. In this respect, several methods have been standardized to assess cell viability. These assays include common methods such as Trypan blue colorimetric method rather than the more complex ones such as MTT or XTT. Each of these methods has some merits and demerits compared to others.  Some factors such as cost, speed, sensitivity and the required equipment are involved in selecting the suitable procedure. Despite the simplicity and cost-effectiveness of cell morphology evaluation, the sensitivity of this method is not very high and it is not adequate for short-term effects of materials. Trypan blue method is a common practice in the assessment of cell viability due to damage to cell membrane. This method, like other methods depends on the integrity of the membrane (Lactate Dehydrogenase release and fluorescent assays), is ineffective where there is cell damage without membrane damage. Despite being highly accurate, cologenic, fluorescent and flow cytometry assays are expensive and laborious. MTT assay as a simple, robust, rapid and cost-effective method is able to simultaneously evaluate a large number of samples. XTT assay is newer and more sensitive than MTT method. But contrary to MTT, it is not suitable for all kinds of cells. Generally, MTT assay is widely used as a reliable method. The current study aims to provide an overview of the most common methods used to evaluate cell viability and also weigh up the pros and cons of each method.
评估细胞活力的最常用方法概述
在研究各种物质对细胞的影响时,测量细胞的增殖和存活是非常重要的。在这方面,已有几种方法被标准化以评估细胞活力。这些检测包括常见的方法,如台盼蓝比色法,而不是更复杂的方法,如MTT或XTT。这些方法各有优缺点。在选择合适的程序时,涉及到成本、速度、灵敏度和所需设备等因素。尽管细胞形态评价方法简单且具有成本效益,但该方法的灵敏度不是很高,不能满足材料的短期效应。台盼蓝法是评估细胞膜损伤后细胞活力的常用方法。与其他方法一样,这种方法依赖于膜的完整性(乳酸脱氢酶释放和荧光测定),在有细胞损伤而没有膜损伤的情况下无效。尽管准确度很高,但结肠原性、荧光和流式细胞术检测既昂贵又费力。MTT法是一种简便、可靠、快速、经济的检测方法,可同时检测大量样品。XTT法比MTT法更新,灵敏度更高。但与MTT相反,它并不适用于所有类型的细胞。一般来说,MTT法作为一种可靠的方法被广泛使用。目前的研究旨在概述用于评估细胞活力的最常用方法,并权衡每种方法的利弊。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science
Journal of Research in Medical and Dental Science MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信