Cited by 34Acute Kidney Injury ResearchCardiac Ischemia and ReperfusionChronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes

Experimental strategies to improve in vitro models of renal ischemia

Russ, Alissa L., Haberstroh, Karen M., Rundell, Ann E.·2007·Experimental and Molecular Pathology

Abstract

Ischemia has elicited a great deal of interest among the scientific community due to its role in life-threatening pathologies such as cancer, stroke, acute renal failure, and myocardial infarction. Oxygen deprivation (hypoxia) associated with ischemia has recently become a subject of intense scrutiny. New investigators may find it challenging to induce hypoxic injury in vitro. Researchers may not always be aware of the experimental barriers that contribute to this phenomenon. Furthermore, ischemia is associated with other major insults, such as excess carbon dioxide (hypercapnia), nutrient deprivation, and accumulation of cellular wastes. Ideally, these conditions should also be incorporated into in vitro models. Therefore, the motivation behind this review is to: i. delineate major in vivo ischemic insults; ii. identify and explain critical in vitro parameters that need to be considered when simulating ischemic pathologies; iii. provide recommendations to improve experiments; and as a result, iv. enhance the validity of in vitro results for understanding clinical ischemic pathologies. Undoubtedly, it is not possible to completely replicate the in vivo environment in an ex vivo model system. In fact, the primary goal of many in vitro studies is to elucidate the role of specific stimuli during in vivo pathological events. This review will present methodologies that may be implemented to improve the applicability of in vitro models for understanding the complex pathological mec…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.yexmp.2007.03.002

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Russ, A. L., Haberstroh, K. M., & Rundell, A. E.
Affiliations
  • Purdue University West Lafayette (US)
  • Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Rundell, Ann E.
Venue
Experimental and Molecular Pathology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-10
Volume
83
Issue
2
Pages
143-159
ISSN
0014-4800 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2049016339
Cited by
34
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Experimental and Molecular Pathology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Acute Kidney Injury Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Cardiac Ischemia and Reperfusion
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Nephrology › Chronic Kidney Disease and Diabetes
Keywords
renal ischemia, hypoxia, in vitro model, oxygen deprivation, hypercapnia, nutrient deprivation, model validity, ex vivo model, acute kidney injury
MeSH terms
Humans, Hypercapnia, Ischemia, Kidney Diseases, Kidney Medulla, Kidney Tubules, Proximal, Renal Circulation, Cell Hypoxia, Urothelium

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review