Table 2 Implications of different purification/selection techniques

From: Isolation, purification and flow cytometric analysis of human intrahepatic lymphocytes using an improved technique

Protocol

Viability (% mean)

% Mean±s.d.a

  

CD19 +

CD14 +

CD3 +

CD4 +

CD8 +

CD161 +

(1) Filtration

88.1

7.3±0.3

15.2±0.5

36.8±1.8

7.2±4.7

19.2±4.6

18.7±5.3

(2) Filtration and fluorescence gatingb

88.1

6.6±0.2

5.8±0.6

50.0±2.5

13.4±7.3

25.1±3.8

25.2±2.7

(3) CD2 beads and fluorescence gating

95.4

0.8±0.4

4.2±0.5

77.5±4.8

18.8±5.6

36.4±8.7

18±3.3

(4) CD56 beads and fluorescence gating

97.3

0.3±0.081

0.5±0.1

—

—

—

52.6±2.8

  1. aValues represent the percentage of each subset out of the gated population.
  2. bLight scatter gating was used to sort cells in protocol 1 and fluorescence gating (CD45-CY5) to sort cells in the other three protocols.
  3. Mann–Whitney U-test was used to test the difference between different protocols. The difference was statistically significant between prtocol 1 and 2 in all subsets; and significant between protocol 1 and 2 vs 3 in CD19+, CD14+, CD3+, CD8+ cells (P<0.01).
  4. The difference was significant between protocol 1 and 4 in tested subsets; and between 2 and 4 protocols CD19+ and CD14+ cell contamination. CD161+ subsets are not compared in protocol 1 and 2 vs 3 or 4 due to the selective nature of the magnetic beads in protocols 3 and 4.
  5. — Not tested.
Back to article page