medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-779X (Digital)
ISSN 2007-6452 (Impreso)

2016, Número 3

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Investigación en Discapacidad 2016; 5 (3)


Principios y aplicaciones de la microscopia láser confocal en la investigación biomédica

López-Macay A, Fernández-Torres J, Zepeda A

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 49
Paginas: 156-164
Archivo PDF: 256.77 Kb.


RESUMEN

La microscopia confocal es una herramienta ampliamente utilizada y de apoyo en el área biomédica que ofrece la posibilidad de obtener imágenes con una alta resolución espacial. Lo anterior se debe al principio de confocalidad que permite dirigir el haz de luz láser que ilumina la muestra a un plano focal limitado por el usuario, lo que evita que la adquisición de información quede fuera de foco, lo que mejora significativamente la resolución espacial en particular en el plano «z» (plano de profundidad) de una imagen, generando información más precisa que la que genera un sistema de fluorescencia convencional. Con la microscopia confocal es posible obtener y analizar imágenes tanto de cultivos celulares, como de especímenes con un grosor en el rango de los cientos de micras tales como secciones de tejido que contengan células y moléculas autofluorescentes o marcadas con fluoróforos. Su principal ventaja radica en la obtención de imágenes nítidas de planos correspondientes a 0.5 µm de grosor y que en conjunto con programas de imágenes de libre acceso, pueden realizarse reconstrucciones y análisis en tres dimensiones de las imágenes adquiridas. El constante desarrollo tecnológico ha facilitado el uso de la técnica y el desarrollo de nuevas aplicaciones en áreas de la biomedicina, la biología y la biotecnología. El propósito de esta revisión es dar a conocer las aplicaciones de la microscopia confocal en el campo de la biomedicina, exponiendo las ventajas que presenta con respecto a la microscopia de fluorescencia convencional y mostrar que constituye una técnica de gran alcance en la investigación biomédica que se encuentra disponible en diversas instituciones educativas y de investigación nacional, incluyendo el Instituto Nacional de Rehabilitación.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Sheppard CJ, Wilson T. The theory of the direct-view confocal microscope. J Microsc. 1981; 124: 107-117.

  2. Amos WB, White JG, Fordham M. Use of confocal imaging in the study of biological structures. Appl Opt. 1987; 26: 3239-3243.

  3. Coling D, Kachar B. Principles and application of fluorescence microscopy. Curr Protoc Mol Biol. 2001. Chapter 14: Unit 14. 10. doi: 10.1002/0471142727.mb1410s44.

  4. Sluder G, Nordberg JJ. Microscope basics. Methods Cell Biol. 2003; 72: 1-10.

  5. Saldua MA, Olsovsky CA, Callaway ES, Chapkin RS, Maitland KC. Imaging inflammation in mouse colon using a rapid stage-scanning confocal fluorescence microscope. J Biomed Opt. 2012; 17: 016006. doi: 10.1117/1.JBO.17.1.016006.

  6. Sezgin E, Schwille P. Fluorescence techniques to study lipid dynamics. Cold Spring Harb Perspect Biol. 2011; 3 (11): a009803. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a009803.

  7. White JG, Amos WB, Fordham M. An evaluation of confocal versus conventional imaging of biological structures by fluorescence light microscopy. J Cell Biol. 1987; 105: 41-48.

  8. Wessels JT, Yamauchi K, Hoffman RM, Wouters FS. Advances in cellular, subcellular, and nanoscale imaging in vitro and in vivo. Cytometry A. 2010; 77: 667-676.

  9. Wolenski, JS, Julich D. Fluorescence microscopy gets faster and clearer: roles of photochemistry and selective illumination. Yale J Biol Med. 2014; 87: 21-32.

  10. Dufour P, Dufour S, Castonguay A, McCarthy N, De Koninck Y. Two-photon laser scanning fluorescence microscopy for functional cellular imaging: Advantages and challenges or one photon is good... but two is better. Med Sci (Paris). 2006; 22: 837-844.

  11. Stelzer EH, Wacker I, De Mey JR. Confocal fluorescence microscopy in modern cell biology. Semin Cell Biol. 1991; 2: 145-152.

  12. Fritzky L, Lagunoff D. Advanced methods in fluorescence microscopy. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2013; 185: 23-42.

  13. Földes-Papp Z1, Demel U, Tilz GP. Laser scanning confocal fluorescence microscopy: an overview. Int Immunopharmacol. 2003; 3 (13-14): 1715-1729.

  14. Cardinale M. Scanning a microhabitat: plant-microbe interactions revealed by confocal laser microscopy. Front Microbiol. 2014; 5: 94.

  15. Wright SJ, Centonze VE, Stricker SA, De Vries PJ, Paddock SW, Schatten G. Introduction to confocal microscopy and three-dimensional reconstruction. Methods Cell Biol. 1993; 38: 1-45.

  16. Piston DW. Choosing objective lenses: the importance of numerical aperture and magnification in digital optical microscopy. Biol Bull. 1998; 195: 1-4.

  17. Piliszek A, Kwon GS, Hadjantonakis AK. Ex utero culture and live imaging of mouse embryos. Methods Mol Biol. 2011; 770: 243-257.

  18. Selever J, Kong JQ, Arenkiel BR. A rapid approach to high-resolution fluorescence imaging in semi-thick brain slices. J Vis Exp. 2011; 26: 53. doi: 10.3791/2807.

  19. Ethell DW, Cameron DJ. Imaging and 3D reconstruction of cerebrovascular structures in embryonic zebrafish. J Vis Exp. 2014; (86). doi: 10.3791/50417.

  20. Xiao W, Chen X, Li W, Ye S, Wang W, Luo L et al. Quantitative analysis of injury-induced anterior subcapsular cataract in the mouse: a model of lens epithelial cells proliferation and epithelial-mesenchymal transition. Sci Rep. 2015; 5: 8362. doi: 10.1038/srep08362.

  21. Choi S, Kim JW, Lee YJ, Delmas T, Kim C, Park S et al. Evaluation of transdermal delivery of nanoemulsions in ex vivo porcine skin using two-photon microscopy and confocal laser-scanning microscopy. J Biomed Opt. 2014; 19 (10): 106006. doi: 10.1117/1.JBO.19.10.106006.

  22. Hwang Y, Ahn J, Mun J, Bae S, Jeong YU, Vinokurov NA et al. In vivo analysis of THz wave irradiation induced acute inflammatory response in skin by laser-scanning confocal microscopy. Opt Express. 2014; 22: 11465-11475.

  23. Beauquis J, Vinuesa A, Pomilio C, Pavia P, Saravia F. Hippocampal and cognitive alterations precede amyloid deposition in a mouse model for Alzheimer’s disease. Medicina (B Aires). 2014; 74: 282-286.

  24. Frasconi P, Silvestri L, Soda P, Cortini R, Pavone FS, Iannello G. Large-scale automated identification of mouse brain cells in confocal light sheet microscopy images. Bioinformatics. 2014; 30: i587-i593.

  25. Koehler MJ, Speicher M, Lange-Asschenfeldt S, Stockfleth E, Metz S, Elsner P et al. Clinical application of multiphoton tomography in combination with confocal laser scanning microscopy for in vivo evaluation of skin diseases. Exp Dermatol. 2011; 20: 589-594.

  26. Sattler E, Kastle R, Arens-Corell M, Welzel J. How long does protection last? In vivo fluorescence confocal laser scanning imaging for the evaluation of the kinetics of a topically applied lotion in an everyday setting. Skin Res Technol. 2012; 18: 370-377.

  27. Edwards K, Pritchard N, Vagenas D, Russell A, Malik RA, Efron N. Utility of corneal confocal microscopy for assessing mild diabetic neuropathy: baseline findings of the LANDMark study. Clin Exp Optom. 2012; 95: 348-354.

  28. Wu T, Ahmed A, Bril V, Orszag A, Ng E, Nwe P. Variables associated with corneal confocal microscopy parameters in healthy volunteers: implications for diabetic neuropathy screening. Diabet Med. 2012; 29: e297-e303.

  29. Pautke C, Bauer F, Bissinger O, Tischer T, Kreutzer K, Steiner T et al. Tetracycline bone fluorescence: a valuable marker for osteonecrosis characterization and therapy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2010; 68: 125-129.

  30. Lanzetta A, Corradini C, Verdoia C, Miani A, Castano S, Castano P. The nervous structures of anterior cruciate ligament of human knee, healthy and lesioned, studied with confocal scanning laser microscopy. Ital J Anat Embryol. 2004; 109: 167-176.

  31. Jensen CG, Poole CA, McGlashan SR, Marko M, Issa ZI, Vujcich KV et al. Ultrastructural, tomographic and confocal imaging of the chondrocyte primary cilium in situ. Cell Biol Int. 2004; 28: 101-110.

  32. Jones CW, Smolinski D, Keogh A, Kirk TB, Zheng MH. Confocal laser scanning microscopy in orthopaedic research. Prog Histochem Cytochem. 2005; 40: 1-71.

  33. Pautke C, Vogt S, Kreutzer K, Haczek C, WexelG, Kolk A et al. Characterization of eight different tetracyclines: advances in fluorescence bone labeling. J Anat. 2010; 217: 76-82.

  34. Luzzati F, Fasolo A, Peretto P. Combining confocal laser scanning microscopy with serial section reconstruction in the study of adult neurogenesis. Front Neurosci. 2011; 5: 70. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2011.00070.

  35. Tam JM, Castro CE, Heath RJ, Mansour MK, Cardenas ML, Xavier RJ et al. Use of an optical trap for study of host-pathogen interactions for dynamic live cell imaging. J Vis Exp. 2011; (53). doi: 10.3791/3123.

  36. Volpi EV, Bridger JM. FISH glossary: an overview of the fluorescence in situ hybridization technique. Biotechniques. 2008; 45: 385-409. doi: 10.2144/000112811.

  37. Golub NV, Kuznetsova VG, Rakitov RA. First karyotype data on the family Myerslopiidae (Hemiptera, Auchenorrhyncha, Cicadomorpha). Comp Cytogenet. 2014; 8: 293-300.

  38. Cavanagh HD, Petroll WM, Alizadeh H, He YG, McCulley JP, Jester JV. Clinical and diagnostic use of in vivo confocal microscopy in patients with corneal disease. Ophthalmology. 1993; 100: 1444-1454.

  39. Das K, De la Garza G, Siwak EB, Scofield VL, Dhandayuthapani S. Mycoplasma genitalium promotes epithelial crossing and peripheral blood mononuclear cell infection by HIV-1. Int J Infect Dis. 2014; 23: 31-38.

  40. Martins VP, Morais SB, Pinheiro CS, Assis NR, Figueiredo BC, Ricci ND et al. Sm10.3, a member of the micro-exon gene 4 (MEG-4) family, induces erythrocyte agglutination in vitro and partially protects vaccinated mice against Schistosoma mansoni infection. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2014; 8 (3): e2750.

  41. Vatter HA, Brinton MA. Differential responses of disease-resistant and disease-susceptible primate macrophages and myeloid dendritic cells to simian hemorrhagic fever virus infection. J Virol. 2014; 88: 2095-2106.

  42. Wang WQ, Wu JF, Xiao XQ, Xiao Q, Wang J, Zuo FG. Narrow-band UVB radiation promotes dendrite formation by activating Rac1 in B16 melanoma cells. Mol Clin Oncol. 2013; 1: 858-862.

  43. De Palma GD. Confocal laser endomicroscopy in the in vivo histological diagnosis of the gastrointestinal tract. World J Gastroenterol. 2009; 15: 5770-5775.

  44. Choi KS, Jung HY. Confocal laser endomicroscopy and molecular imaging in Barrett esophagus and stomach. Clin Endosc. 2014; 47: 23-30.

  45. Tilli MT, Parrish AR, Cotarla I, Jones LP, Johnson MD, Furth PA. Comparison of mouse mammary gland imaging techniques and applications: reflectance confocal microscopy, GFP imaging, and ultrasound. BMC Cancer. 2008; 8: 21. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-8-21.

  46. Coda S, Thillainayagam AV. State of the art in advanced endoscopic imaging for the detection and evaluation of dysplasia and early cancer of the gastrointestinal tract. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2014; 7: 133-150.

  47. Siegel N, Brooker G. Improved axial resolution of FINCH fluorescence microscopy when combined with spinning disk confocal microscopy. Opt Express. 2014; 22: 22298-22307.

  48. Yew E, Rowlands C, So PT. Application of multiphoton microscopy in dermatological studies: a mini-review. J Innov Opt Health Sci. 2014; 7 (5): 1330010.

  49. Zehri AH, Ramey W, Georges JF, Mooney MA, Martirosyan NL, Preul MC et al. Neurosurgical confocal endomicroscopy: A review of contrast agents, confocal systems, and future imaging modalities. Surg Neurol Int. 2014; 5: 60. doi: 10.4103/2152-7806.131638.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com