Table 1 A comparison of methods used to analyse MSC biodistribution patterns in animal models
Method | Used clinically | Terminal/post-mortem | Single-cell resolution | Benefits | Limitations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MRI/CT | ✓ | X | X | Good anatomical structure, unlimited depth, can be used with PET/SPECT | Poor distinction between probe and air, possibility of free probe, expensive, low sensitivity |
PET | ✓ | X | X | High resolution, unlimited depth | Expensive, shorter half-life of probe, no anatomical data, radiation exposure |
SPECT | ✓ | X | X | Inexpensive, longer-lived probe, unlimited depth | Low resolution, no anatomical data, radiation exposure |
BLI | X | X | ✓ | Can distinguish live/dead cells, inexpensive, high sensitivity | Poor tissue penetration, single-cell distinction not possible |
PCR | ✓ | ✓ | X | Highly specific, widely available | Limited observational area, cannot distinguish live/dead, detects genetic material only |
Histology | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | Accessible technique, high-quality images obtained, can demonstrate cell viability, interactions, molecular changes | Cannot account for changes during processing, limited observational area. Requires biopsy/post-mortem samples |
Intravital microscopy | X | ✓ | ✓ | Highly sensitive, allows observation at micrometre scale, phenotypical and morphological cell changes observable | Highly invasive, requires specialised techniques/equipment, limited observational area |