Literature DB >> 23759321

A comparative study of submicron particle sizing platforms: accuracy, precision and resolution analysis of polydisperse particle size distributions.

Will Anderson1, Darby Kozak, Victoria A Coleman, Åsa K Jämting, Matt Trau.   

Abstract

The particle size distribution (PSD) of a polydisperse or multimodal system can often be difficult to obtain due to the inherent limitations in established measurement techniques. For this reason, the resolution, accuracy and precision of three new and one established, commercially available and fundamentally different particle size analysis platforms were compared by measuring both individual and a mixed sample of monodisperse, sub-micron (220, 330, and 410 nm - nominal modal size) polystyrene particles. The platforms compared were the qNano Tunable Resistive Pulse Sensor, Nanosight LM10 Particle Tracking Analysis System, the CPS Instruments's UHR24000 Disc Centrifuge, and the routinely used Malvern Zetasizer Nano ZS Dynamic Light Scattering system. All measurements were subjected to a peak detection algorithm so that the detected particle populations could be compared to 'reference' Transmission Electron Microscope measurements of the individual particle samples. Only the Tunable Resistive Pulse Sensor and Disc Centrifuge platforms provided the resolution required to resolve all three particle populations present in the mixed 'multimodal' particle sample. In contrast, the light scattering based Particle Tracking Analysis and Dynamic Light Scattering platforms were only able to detect a single population of particles corresponding to either the largest (410 nm) or smallest (220 nm) particles in the multimodal sample, respectively. When the particle sets were measured separately (monomodal) each platform was able to resolve and accurately obtain a mean particle size within 10% of the Transmission Electron Microscope reference values. However, the broadness of the PSD measured in the monomodal samples deviated greatly, with coefficients of variation being ~2-6-fold larger than the TEM measurements across all four platforms. The large variation in the PSDs obtained from these four, fundamentally different platforms, indicates that great care must still be taken in the analysis of samples known to have complex PSDs. All of the platforms were found to have high precision, i.e. they gave rise to less than 5% variance in PSD shape descriptors over the replicate measurements.
Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23759321     DOI: 10.1016/j.jcis.2013.02.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Colloid Interface Sci        ISSN: 0021-9797            Impact factor:   8.128


  55 in total

1.  Multimodal Dispersion of Nanoparticles: A Comprehensive Evaluation of Size Distribution with 9 Size Measurement Methods.

Authors:  Fanny Varenne; Ali Makky; Mireille Gaucher-Delmas; Frédéric Violleau; Christine Vauthier
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  Ocular disposition of ciprofloxacin from topical, PEGylated nanostructured lipid carriers: Effect of molecular weight and density of poly (ethylene) glycol.

Authors:  Sai Prachetan Balguri; Goutham R Adelli; Karthik Yadav Janga; Prakash Bhagav; Soumyajit Majumdar
Journal:  Int J Pharm       Date:  2017-06-17       Impact factor: 5.875

3.  Magnetic microbead transport during resistive pulse sensing.

Authors:  Geoff R Willmott; Matthew G Fisk; James Eldridge
Journal:  Biomicrofluidics       Date:  2013-11-22       Impact factor: 2.800

4.  Evaluation of Nanoparticle Tracking for Characterization of Fibrillar Protein Aggregates.

Authors:  Dennis T Yang; Xiaomeng Lu; Yamin Fan; Regina M Murphy
Journal:  AIChE J       Date:  2014-04-01       Impact factor: 3.993

Review 5.  The evolving landscape of drug products containing nanomaterials in the United States.

Authors:  Sheetal R D'Mello; Celia N Cruz; Mei-Ling Chen; Mamta Kapoor; Sau L Lee; Katherine M Tyner
Journal:  Nat Nanotechnol       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 39.213

6.  Oxygen Sensing with Perfluorocarbon-Loaded Ultraporous Mesostructured Silica Nanoparticles.

Authors:  Amani L Lee; Clifford T Gee; Bradley P Weegman; Samuel A Einstein; Adam R Juelfs; Hattie L Ring; Katie R Hurley; Sam M Egger; Garrett Swindlehurst; Michael Garwood; William C K Pomerantz; Christy L Haynes
Journal:  ACS Nano       Date:  2017-05-22       Impact factor: 15.881

7.  Weighing nanoparticles in solution at the attogram scale.

Authors:  Selim Olcum; Nathan Cermak; Steven C Wasserman; Kathleen S Christine; Hiroshi Atsumi; Kris R Payer; Wenjiang Shen; Jungchul Lee; Angela M Belcher; Sangeeta N Bhatia; Scott R Manalis
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-01-13       Impact factor: 11.205

8.  Development of a nanomedicine-loaded hydrogel for sustained delivery of an angiogenic growth factor to the ischaemic myocardium.

Authors:  Joanne O'Dwyer; Robert Murphy; Eimear B Dolan; Lenka Kovarova; Martin Pravda; Vladimir Velebny; Andreas Heise; Garry P Duffy; Sally Ann Cryan
Journal:  Drug Deliv Transl Res       Date:  2020-04       Impact factor: 4.617

9.  Exosomes in disease and regeneration: biological functions, diagnostics, and beneficial effects.

Authors:  Yun Lin; Johnathon D Anderson; Lily M A Rahnama; Shenwen V Gu; Anne A Knowlton
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2020-09-28       Impact factor: 4.733

10.  Simultaneous Electro-Optical Tracking for Nanoparticle Recognition and Counting.

Authors:  Elena Angeli; Andrea Volpe; Paola Fanzio; Luca Repetto; Giuseppe Firpo; Patrizia Guida; Roberto Lo Savio; Meni Wanunu; Ugo Valbusa
Journal:  Nano Lett       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 11.189

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.