Push–pull perfusion: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:06, 15 November 2022

Revision as of 23:00, 6 December 2023

Line 2:

this technique replaced the [[cortical cup]] technique for observing neurotransmitters. The advent of concentric [[microdialysis]] probes in the 1980s resulted in push-pull sampling falling out of favor, as such probes require less monitoring, and are less invasive than the higher flow rate push-pull probes (>10&nbsp;microliter/min), which could result in lesions if flow is unbalanced.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Myers|first=R.D.|author2=Adell, A. |author3=Lankford, M.F. |title=Simultaneous comparison of cerebral dialysis and push-pull perfusion in the brain of rats: a critical review|journal=Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews|year=1998|volume=22|issue=3|pages=371–387|doi=10.1016/S0149-7634(97)00025-0 |pmid=9579326|s2cid=36994607}}</ref>

==Advances==

With the advent of [[microfluidics]] and miniaturized probes, low-flow push–pull sampling was developed in 2002.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Kottegoda|first=Sumith|author2=Shaik, Imtiazuddin |author3=Shippy, Scott A. |title=Demonstration of low flow push-pull perfusion|journal=Journal of Neuroscience Methods|year=2002|volume=121|issue=1|pages=93–101|doi=10.1016/S0165-0270(02)00245-5|pmid=12393165 |s2cid=23666332}}</ref> By using flow rates of ~50 [[Nanoliter|nL]]/min, this technique minimizes tissue damage while providing finer spatial resolution than [[microdialysis]] sampling.