Bolaji J Samuel, Zhaorui Jin, Delia S Brauer, Georg Matziolis, Victoria Horbert
{"title":"评价细胞活力评估技术:流式细胞术和荧光显微镜对生物活性玻璃暴露的比较研究。","authors":"Bolaji J Samuel, Zhaorui Jin, Delia S Brauer, Georg Matziolis, Victoria Horbert","doi":"10.1186/s12938-025-01452-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Reliable in vitro cytotoxicity assessment of biomaterials is essential for preclinical evaluation. Fluorescence microscopy (FM) and flow cytometry (FCM) are widely used methods, yet their comparative performance in particulate systems remains underexplored. This study compares FM and FCM in evaluating the cytotoxicity of Bioglass 45S5 (BG) on SAOS-2 osteoblast-like cells across different particle sizes and concentrations. The cells were treated with BG particles in three size ranges (< 38 µm, 63-125 µm, and 315-500 µm) at concentrations of 25, 50, and 100 mg/mL for 3 and 72 h. FM employs FDA/PI staining to distinguish viable and nonviable cells, whereas FCM utilizes multiparametric staining (Hoechst, DiIC1, Annexin V-FITC, and PI) to classify viable, apoptotic, and necrotic populations. Both techniques confirmed a clear trend: smaller particles and higher concentrations caused greater cytotoxicity. The most pronounced effect was observed for < 38 µm particles at 100 mg/mL, which reduced FM-assessed viability to 9% at 3 h and 10% at 72 h; FCM measurements under the same conditions revealed 0.2% and 0.7% viability, respectively. The controls retained > 97% viability, indicating size-based cytotoxicity. A strong correlation between FM and FCM data (r = 0.94, R<sup>2</sup> = 0.8879, p < 0.0001) was observed. FCM further distinguished early and late apoptosis from necrosis and demonstrated superior precision, particularly under high cytotoxic stress. These findings highlight the size- and dose-dependent cytotoxic potential of BG and support the use of FCM as a robust, quantitative tool for cytocompatibility evaluation in particulate biomaterial research.</p>","PeriodicalId":8927,"journal":{"name":"BioMedical Engineering OnLine","volume":"24 1","pages":"112"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12492793/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluating cell viability assessment techniques: a comparative study of flow cytometry and fluorescence microscopy in response to bioactive glass exposure.\",\"authors\":\"Bolaji J Samuel, Zhaorui Jin, Delia S Brauer, Georg Matziolis, Victoria Horbert\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12938-025-01452-y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Reliable in vitro cytotoxicity assessment of biomaterials is essential for preclinical evaluation. Fluorescence microscopy (FM) and flow cytometry (FCM) are widely used methods, yet their comparative performance in particulate systems remains underexplored. This study compares FM and FCM in evaluating the cytotoxicity of Bioglass 45S5 (BG) on SAOS-2 osteoblast-like cells across different particle sizes and concentrations. The cells were treated with BG particles in three size ranges (< 38 µm, 63-125 µm, and 315-500 µm) at concentrations of 25, 50, and 100 mg/mL for 3 and 72 h. FM employs FDA/PI staining to distinguish viable and nonviable cells, whereas FCM utilizes multiparametric staining (Hoechst, DiIC1, Annexin V-FITC, and PI) to classify viable, apoptotic, and necrotic populations. Both techniques confirmed a clear trend: smaller particles and higher concentrations caused greater cytotoxicity. The most pronounced effect was observed for < 38 µm particles at 100 mg/mL, which reduced FM-assessed viability to 9% at 3 h and 10% at 72 h; FCM measurements under the same conditions revealed 0.2% and 0.7% viability, respectively. The controls retained > 97% viability, indicating size-based cytotoxicity. A strong correlation between FM and FCM data (r = 0.94, R<sup>2</sup> = 0.8879, p < 0.0001) was observed. FCM further distinguished early and late apoptosis from necrosis and demonstrated superior precision, particularly under high cytotoxic stress. These findings highlight the size- and dose-dependent cytotoxic potential of BG and support the use of FCM as a robust, quantitative tool for cytocompatibility evaluation in particulate biomaterial research.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BioMedical Engineering OnLine\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12492793/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BioMedical Engineering OnLine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-025-01452-y\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BioMedical Engineering OnLine","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12938-025-01452-y","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, BIOMEDICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
可靠的体外细胞毒性评估是临床前评估生物材料的必要条件。荧光显微镜(FM)和流式细胞术(FCM)是广泛使用的方法,但它们在颗粒系统中的比较性能仍未得到充分研究。本研究比较了生物玻璃45S5 (BG)在不同粒径和浓度下对SAOS-2成骨样细胞的细胞毒性。用三个大小范围的BG颗粒处理细胞(97%存活率,表明基于大小的细胞毒性)。FM和FCM数据有很强的相关性(r = 0.94, R2 = 0.8879, p
Evaluating cell viability assessment techniques: a comparative study of flow cytometry and fluorescence microscopy in response to bioactive glass exposure.
Reliable in vitro cytotoxicity assessment of biomaterials is essential for preclinical evaluation. Fluorescence microscopy (FM) and flow cytometry (FCM) are widely used methods, yet their comparative performance in particulate systems remains underexplored. This study compares FM and FCM in evaluating the cytotoxicity of Bioglass 45S5 (BG) on SAOS-2 osteoblast-like cells across different particle sizes and concentrations. The cells were treated with BG particles in three size ranges (< 38 µm, 63-125 µm, and 315-500 µm) at concentrations of 25, 50, and 100 mg/mL for 3 and 72 h. FM employs FDA/PI staining to distinguish viable and nonviable cells, whereas FCM utilizes multiparametric staining (Hoechst, DiIC1, Annexin V-FITC, and PI) to classify viable, apoptotic, and necrotic populations. Both techniques confirmed a clear trend: smaller particles and higher concentrations caused greater cytotoxicity. The most pronounced effect was observed for < 38 µm particles at 100 mg/mL, which reduced FM-assessed viability to 9% at 3 h and 10% at 72 h; FCM measurements under the same conditions revealed 0.2% and 0.7% viability, respectively. The controls retained > 97% viability, indicating size-based cytotoxicity. A strong correlation between FM and FCM data (r = 0.94, R2 = 0.8879, p < 0.0001) was observed. FCM further distinguished early and late apoptosis from necrosis and demonstrated superior precision, particularly under high cytotoxic stress. These findings highlight the size- and dose-dependent cytotoxic potential of BG and support the use of FCM as a robust, quantitative tool for cytocompatibility evaluation in particulate biomaterial research.
期刊介绍:
BioMedical Engineering OnLine is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that is dedicated to publishing research in all areas of biomedical engineering.
BioMedical Engineering OnLine is aimed at readers and authors throughout the world, with an interest in using tools of the physical and data sciences and techniques in engineering to understand and solve problems in the biological and medical sciences. Topical areas include, but are not limited to:
Bioinformatics-
Bioinstrumentation-
Biomechanics-
Biomedical Devices & Instrumentation-
Biomedical Signal Processing-
Healthcare Information Systems-
Human Dynamics-
Neural Engineering-
Rehabilitation Engineering-
Biomaterials-
Biomedical Imaging & Image Processing-
BioMEMS and On-Chip Devices-
Bio-Micro/Nano Technologies-
Biomolecular Engineering-
Biosensors-
Cardiovascular Systems Engineering-
Cellular Engineering-
Clinical Engineering-
Computational Biology-
Drug Delivery Technologies-
Modeling Methodologies-
Nanomaterials and Nanotechnology in Biomedicine-
Respiratory Systems Engineering-
Robotics in Medicine-
Systems and Synthetic Biology-
Systems Biology-
Telemedicine/Smartphone Applications in Medicine-
Therapeutic Systems, Devices and Technologies-
Tissue Engineering