Victor G Puelles1, John F Bertram. 1. Department of Anatomy and Developmental Biology, School of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing, and Health Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is currently much interest in the numbers of both glomeruli and podocytes. This interest stems from a greater understanding of the effects of suboptimal fetal events on nephron endowment, the associations between low nephron number and chronic cardiovascular and kidney disease in adults, and the emergence of the podocyte depletion hypothesis. RECENT FINDINGS: Obtaining accurate and precise estimates of glomerular and podocyte number has proven surprisingly difficult. When whole kidneys or large tissue samples are available, design-based stereological methods are considered gold standard because they are based on principles that negate systematic bias. However, these methods are often tedious and time consuming, and oftentimes inapplicable when dealing with small samples such as biopsies. Therefore, novel methods suitable for small tissue samples, and innovative approaches to facilitate high throughput measurements, such as MRI to estimate glomerular number and flow cytometry to estimate podocyte number, have recently been described. SUMMARY: This review describes current gold-standard methods for estimating glomerular and podocyte number, as well as methods developed in the past 3 years. We are now better placed than ever before to accurately and precisely estimate glomerular and podocyte number, and examine relationships between these measurements and kidney health and disease.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: There is currently much interest in the numbers of both glomeruli and podocytes. This interest stems from a greater understanding of the effects of suboptimal fetal events on nephron endowment, the associations between low nephron number and chronic cardiovascular and kidney disease in adults, and the emergence of the podocyte depletion hypothesis. RECENT FINDINGS: Obtaining accurate and precise estimates of glomerular and podocyte number has proven surprisingly difficult. When whole kidneys or large tissue samples are available, design-based stereological methods are considered gold standard because they are based on principles that negate systematic bias. However, these methods are often tedious and time consuming, and oftentimes inapplicable when dealing with small samples such as biopsies. Therefore, novel methods suitable for small tissue samples, and innovative approaches to facilitate high throughput measurements, such as MRI to estimate glomerular number and flow cytometry to estimate podocyte number, have recently been described. SUMMARY: This review describes current gold-standard methods for estimating glomerular and podocyte number, as well as methods developed in the past 3 years. We are now better placed than ever before to accurately and precisely estimate glomerular and podocyte number, and examine relationships between these measurements and kidney health and disease.
Authors: John F Bertram; Luise A Cullen-McEwen; Gary F Egan; Norbert Gretz; Edwin Baldelomar; Scott C Beeman; Kevin M Bennett Journal: Pediatr Nephrol Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 3.714
Authors: Paolo Fiorina; Andrea Vergani; Roberto Bassi; Monika A Niewczas; Mehmet M Altintas; Marcus G Pezzolesi; Francesca D'Addio; Melissa Chin; Sara Tezza; Moufida Ben Nasr; Deborah Mattinzoli; Masami Ikehata; Domenico Corradi; Valerie Schumacher; Lisa Buvall; Chih-Chuan Yu; Jer-Ming Chang; Stefano La Rosa; Giovanna Finzi; Anna Solini; Flavio Vincenti; Maria Pia Rastaldi; Jochen Reiser; Andrzej S Krolewski; Peter H Mundel; Mohamed H Sayegh Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2014-03-27 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Victor G Puelles; James W van der Wolde; Keith E Schulze; Kieran M Short; Milagros N Wong; Jonathan G Bensley; Luise A Cullen-McEwen; Georgina Caruana; Stacey N Hokke; Jinhua Li; Stephen D Firth; Ian S Harper; David J Nikolic-Paterson; John F Bertram Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2016-03-14 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Shan Zhao; Mihail Ivilinov Todorov; Ruiyao Cai; Rami Ai -Maskari; Hanno Steinke; Elisabeth Kemter; Hongcheng Mai; Zhouyi Rong; Martin Warmer; Karen Stanic; Oliver Schoppe; Johannes Christian Paetzold; Benno Gesierich; Milagros N Wong; Tobias B Huber; Marco Duering; Oliver Thomas Bruns; Bjoern Menze; Jan Lipfert; Victor G Puelles; Eckhard Wolf; Ingo Bechmann; Ali Ertürk Journal: Cell Date: 2020-02-13 Impact factor: 41.582
Authors: Darshana Govind; Jan U Becker; Jeffrey Miecznikowski; Avi Z Rosenberg; Julien Dang; Pierre Louis Tharaux; Rabi Yacoub; Friedrich Thaiss; Peter F Hoyer; David Manthey; Brendon Lutnick; Amber M Worral; Imtiaz Mohammad; Vighnesh Walavalkar; John E Tomaszewski; Kuang-Yu Jen; Pinaki Sarder Journal: J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2021-09-03 Impact factor: 10.121
Authors: Daniel Robert Kaufman; Joan Papillon; Louise Larose; Takao Iwawaki; Andrey V Cybulsky Journal: Mol Biol Cell Date: 2017-04-20 Impact factor: 4.138
Authors: Ken Dower; Shanrong Zhao; Franklin J Schlerman; Leigh Savary; Gabriela Campanholle; Bryce G Johnson; Li Xi; Vuong Nguyen; Yutian Zhan; Matthew P Lech; Ju Wang; Qing Nie; Morten A Karsdal; Federica Genovese; Germaine Boucher; Thomas P Brown; Baohong Zhang; Bruce L Homer; Robert V Martinez Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-07-26 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Danica Ryan; Megan R Sutherland; Tracey J Flores; Alison L Kent; Jane E Dahlstrom; Victor G Puelles; John F Bertram; Andrew P McMahon; Melissa H Little; Lynette Moore; Mary Jane Black Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2017-12-20 Impact factor: 8.143
Authors: Daria V Ilatovskaya; Vladislav Levchenko; Andrea Lowing; Leonid S Shuyskiy; Oleg Palygin; Alexander Staruschenko Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Janina Müller-Deile; Jan Hinrich Bräsen; Marion Pollheimer; Manfred Ratschek; Hermann Haller; Lars Pape; Mario Schiffer Journal: Transplant Direct Date: 2017-09-05