Comparison of methods for counting cells in the mouse glomerulus
Comparison of methods for counting cells in the mouse glomerulus
复制标题
DOI：
10.1159/000092905
复制
发表时间：
2006-01-01
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Nyengaard, Jens R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Basgen, John M.;Nicholas, Susanne B.;Nyengaard, Jens R.
背景：研究人员一直对计算肾小球内细胞的数量感兴趣。使用不同技术的调查人员得出了相互矛盾的结果。最直接的方法是从整个肾小球连续切片中计数细胞。这种穷举计数方法通常不实用。解剖器/分级器方法计数切片部分中的细胞数量。总数是由细胞计数与分数倒数的乘积估计的。Weibel-Gomez方法测定每个肾小球的细胞密度，然后将该密度乘以肾小球体积以获得细胞数。在这项研究中，我们比较了分解器/分馏器和韦伯-戈麦斯方法，以确定一个实用的替代费时的穷举计数方法。方法：取正常小鼠肾组织，完整切片，获取图像。使用每种方法，使用适当的图像来计数肾小球细胞数。结果如下：极限计数法得到213 +/- 22（平均值+/- SD）个细胞/肾小球，而分离器/分离器的平均值为211 +/- 29个细胞/肾小球（p = 0.82）。235 +/-26个细胞/肾小球的韦伯-戈麦斯法平均值与极限计数法存在统计学差异（p = 0.003）。结论：Weibel-Gomez产生了10%的高估，而分割器/分馏器方法是无偏的，因此是穷举计数方法的良好替代品。版权所有（c）2006 S. Karger AG，巴塞尔。
Background: Researchers have long been interested in counting the number of cells within the glomerulus. Investigators using different techniques have yielded confl icting results. The most direct method is to count the cells in serial sections from the entire glomerulus. This Exhaustive Count method is not usually practical. The disector/fractionator method counts the number of cells in a fraction of sections. The total is estimated from the product of the cell count and the reciprocal of the fraction. The Weibel-Gomez method determines the density of cells per glomerulus, then multiplies this density by glomerular volume to obtain cell number. In this study, we compared the disector/ fractionator and Weibel-Gomez methods to identify a practical alternative for the time-consuming Exhaustive Count method. Methods: Glomeruli from a normal mouse kidney were completely sectioned and images obtained. Appropriate images were used to count glomerular cell number using each method. Results: The Exhaustive Count method yielded 213 +/- 22 (mean +/- SD) cells/glomerulus vs. the disector/fractionator average of 211 +/- 29 cells/glomerulus (p = 0.82). The Weibel- Gomez method average of 235 +/- 26 cells/glomerulus was statistically different from the Exhaustive Count method ( p = 0.003). Conclusion: The Weibel-Gomez produced a 10% overestimation, whereas the disector/ fractionator method was unbiased and thus a good substitute for the Exhaustive Count method. Copyright (c) 2006 S. Karger AG, Basel.