FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W1988342207> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W1988342207 endingPage "20.e1" @default.
• W1988342207 startingPage "15" @default.
• W1988342207 abstract "Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a relatively new disease with about a 10-fold increase in prevalence over the past 20 years.1Nonevski I.T. Downs-Kelly E. Falk G.W. Eosinophilic esophagitis: an increasingly recognized cause of dysphagia, food impaction, and refractory heartburn.Cleve Clin J Med. 2008; 75: 623-636Crossref PubMed Scopus (19) Google Scholar, 2Potter J.W. Saeian K. Staff D. et al.Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: an emerging problem with unique esophageal features.Gastrointest Endosc. 2004; 59: 355-361Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (264) Google Scholar It has been found in approximately 6.5% of the population undergoing upper endoscopy.3Veerappan G.R. Perry J.L. Duncan T.J. et al.Prevalence of eosinophilic esophagitis in an adult population undergoing upper endoscopy: a prospective study.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009; 7: 420-426Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (200) Google Scholar This disease has become one of the leading causes of dysphagia and food impaction in adults. For diagnosis, endoscopy is performed and multiple biopsies are collected at random throughout the length of the esophagus, including the proximal and distal regions. On histopathology, the primary feature of EoE is infiltration of eosinophils into the mucosa. These mediators of inflammation may contribute to the development of structural abnormalities of the esophagus, including edema, rings, furrows, and strictures.4Straumann A. Spichtin H.P. Grize L. et al.Natural history of primary eosinophilic esophagitis: a follow-up of 30 adult patients for up to 11.5 years.Gastroenterology. 2003; 125: 1660-1669Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (632) Google Scholar Clinical symptoms do not improve with high-dose proton pump inhibitor therapy, and the pH in distal esophagus is usually normal.5Furuta G.T. Liacouras C.A. Collins M.H. et al.First International Gastrointestinal Eosinophil Research Symposium (FIGERS) Subcommittees Eosinophilic esophagitis in children and adults: a systematic review and consensus recommendations for diagnosis and treatment.Gastroenterology. 2007; 133: 1342-1363Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1334) Google Scholar However, the diagnostic criteria for this disease seem to lack clarity. EoE may be difficult to distinguish from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD),6Parfitt J.R. Gregor J.C. Suskin N.G. et al.Eosinophilic esophagitis in adults: distinguishing features from gastroesophageal reflux disease: a study of 41 patients.Mod Pathol. 2006; 19: 90-96Crossref PubMed Scopus (196) Google Scholar which is also associated with increased eosinophilia, but to a lesser extent. The 2 diseases may be present at the same time. Eosinophils can also trigger allergic symptoms in other parts of the gastrointestinal tract.7Lucendo A.J. Eosinophilic diseases of the gastrointestinal tract.Scand J Gastroenterol. 2010; 45: 1013-1021Crossref PubMed Scopus (44) Google Scholar The degree of mucosal hypereosinophilia that defines EoE is controversial. Although a diagnostic criteria of ≥15 eosinophils per high-power field (hpf) on histology has been proposed,5Furuta G.T. Liacouras C.A. Collins M.H. et al.First International Gastrointestinal Eosinophil Research Symposium (FIGERS) Subcommittees Eosinophilic esophagitis in children and adults: a systematic review and consensus recommendations for diagnosis and treatment.Gastroenterology. 2007; 133: 1342-1363Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1334) Google Scholar values as high as 30 eosinophils per hpf have been used, and no single number is widely accepted.8Gonsalves N. Policarpio-Nicolas M. Zhang Q. et al.Histopathologic variability and endoscopic correlates in adults with eosinophilic esophagitis.Gastrointest Endosc. 2006; 64: 313-319Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (376) Google Scholar, 9Shah A. Kagalwalla A.F. Gonsalves N. et al.Histopathologic variability in children with eosinophilic esophagitis.Am J Gastroenterol. 2009; 104: 716-721Crossref PubMed Scopus (151) Google Scholar, 10Arora A.S. Yamazaki K. Eosinophilic esophagitis: asthma of the esophagus?.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004; 2: 523-530Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (162) Google Scholar Diagnostic uncertainty for this disease may be attributed in part to its patchy and focal nature. In addition, little is known about the density or spatial distribution of eosinophils throughout the mucosa. Marked variability has been found within and between biopsy specimens of individual patients, resulting in a low sensitivity for detection. Currently, biopsy specimens are sectioned along a plane whose orientation to the mucosal surface is unknown. A nonuniform distribution of infiltrating eosinophils within the mucosa could result in a highly variable cell count that depends on the angle of sectioning, resulting in an inaccurate result. A novel method that can quickly and reliably quantify the number of cells over a 3-dimensional (3D) volume could be used to overcome this tissue processing limitation. Human eosinophils contain granules that produce an intense autofluorescence in comparison with the surrounding squamous epithelium.11Weil G.J. Chused T.M. Eosinophil autofluorescence and its use in isolation and analysis of human eosinophils using flow microfluorometry.Blood. 1981; 57: 1099-1104Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 12Samoszuk M.K. Espinoza F.P. Deposition of autofluorescent eosinophil granules in pathologic bone marrow biopsies.Blood. 1987; 70: 597-599Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 13Barnes D. Aggarwal S. Thomsen S. et al.A characterization of the fluorescent properties of circulating human eosinophils.Photochem Photobiol. 1993; 58: 297-303Crossref PubMed Scopus (30) Google Scholar There is evidence to support flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) as the source of this endogenous fluorescence.14Mayeno A.N. Hamann K.J. Gleich G.J. Granule-associated flavin adenine dinucleotide (FAD) is responsible for eosinophil autofluorescence.J Leukoc Biol. 1992; 51: 172-175Crossref PubMed Scopus (59) Google Scholar FAD is a coenzyme in the mitochondrial electron transport chain that has a maximum absorption at 445 nm, resulting in a peak fluorescence emission of 525 nm.15Rhee H.W. Choi H.Y. Han K. et al.Selective fluorescent detection of flavin adenine dinucleotide in human eosinophils by using bis(Zn2+-dipicolylamine) complex.J Am Chem Soc. 2007; 129: 4524-4525Crossref PubMed Scopus (67) Google Scholar Multiphoton microscopy (MPM) is a powerful method for collecting fluorescence images from cells and tissues,16Denk W. Strickler J.H. Webb W.W. Two-photon laser scanning fluorescence microscopy.Science. 1990; 248: 73-76Crossref PubMed Scopus (8079) Google Scholar and has been used to perform in vivo imaging of FAD from squamous epithelium in animals.17Skala M.C. Riching K.M. Gendron-Fitzpatrick A. et al.In vivo multiphoton microscopy of NADH and FAD redox states, fluorescence lifetimes, and cellular morphology in precancerous epithelia.Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007; 104: 19494-19499Crossref PubMed Scopus (756) Google Scholar, 18Skala M.C. Squirrell J.M. Vrotsos K.M. et al.Multiphoton microscopy of endogenous fluorescence differentiates normal, precancerous, and cancerous squamous epithelial tissues.Cancer Res. 2005; 65: 1180-1186Crossref PubMed Scopus (209) Google Scholar MPM imaging has inherent 3D resolution, uses near-infrared excitation for superior tissue penetration, has lower photobleaching effects, and is capable of providing quantitative information.19Helmchen F. Denk W. Deep tissue two-photon microscopy.Nat Methods. 2005; 2: 932-940Crossref PubMed Scopus (3056) Google Scholar We have previously demonstrated the use of MPM imaging as a highly accurate method for identifying and quantifying human eosinophils from mucosal smears of patients with allergic rhinitis.20Safdarian N. Liu Z. Wang T.D. et al.Identification of nasal eosinophils using two-photon excited fluorescence.Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2011; 106: 394-400Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar In this study, we sought to demonstrate the use of MPM to detect eosinophils within squamous epithelium, characterize the distribution of eosinophils with depth below the mucosal surface, and quantify the number of eosinophils within a 3D volume. Patients aged 18–65 years who are undergoing routine endoscopy and have symptoms consistent with EoE, including dysphagia or food impaction were recruited before the procedure. Patients were excluded if they had a known bleeding disorder or an elevated International Normalized Ratio (>1.5) owing to anticoagulation. Patients with severe illness such as heart failure, difficulty breathing, or kidney failure were also excluded. Institutional review board approval was obtained for this study from the University of Michigan Medical School. Patients undergoing routine endoscopy were recruited, and written informed consent was obtained. After completion of the routine portion of the endoscopy, additional specimens were collected for research purposes. A total of 4 biopsies were obtained: 2 from the proximal esophagus (∼20–30 cm from the gums) and 2 from the distal esophagus (∼2 cm above the Z-line). The specimens were placed immediately into separate vials containing normal saline, and transferred on ice to the laboratory microscope for imaging. The specimens were placed individually with the luminal side of the mucosa facing downward onto the surface of a #1.5 cover glass in a chamber slide. A small amount of normal saline was used to keep the specimens moist during imaging. Fluorescence images were collected from all specimens within 4 hours of resection. After MPM imaging, the specimens were prepared for pathologic evaluation. Specimens were placed in Eppendorf tubes containing 5 mL of formalin and kept overnight for fixation. The following day, the specimens were immersed in 70% ethanol, cut in 5-μm sections, and stained with hematoxylin and eosin for routine histopathology. The remaining portions of the specimens were paraffin embedded and stored. The specimens were first imaged on a laboratory MPM (model# TCS SP5, Leica Microsystems, Bannockburn, IL) equipped with a tunable, ultrafast laser that has a 100-femtosecond pulse width (Spectra-Physics, Mai Tai HP). MPM excitation at 700 nm was used based on the results of our previous study on cultured cells and human eosinophils,20Safdarian N. Liu Z. Wang T.D. et al.Identification of nasal eosinophils using two-photon excited fluorescence.Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2011; 106: 394-400Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar and fluorescence was collected between 500 and 600 nm. Both 2D and 3D images were obtained from each specimen. To achieve a large field of view (FOV) with deep tissue penetration, a 20× objective with a numerical aperture of 0.70 and working distance of 0.59 mm was used. Images were collected with an FOV of 775 × 775 μm2 from 0 to 200 μm in axial depth. The settings for the laser and the detectors were kept constant for all specimens. Immunohistochemistry was performed to validate the source of the fluorescence. Frozen sections were fixed with 1% paraformaldehyde/phosphate-buffered saline, and then blocked with 20% fetal bovine serum/phosphate-buffered saline for 1 hour at room temperature. Sections were then incubated with mouse anti-EPO primary antibody (clone AHE-1; Chemicon, Billerica, MA) in blocking solution (1:100 dilution) at 4°C overnight. This antibody reacts specifically with the human eosinophil peroxidase, an enzyme that plays an important role in endothelial injury in hypereosinophilic states.21Protheroe C. Woodruff S.A. de Petris G. et al.A novel histologic scoring system to evaluate mucosal biopsies from patients with eosinophilic esophagitis.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009; 7: 749-755Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (153) Google Scholar The specimens were then labeled with Alexa Fluor-594 conjugated goat anti-mouse secondary antibody (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) and mounted with ProLong Gold anti-fade reagent (with DAPI; Invitrogen). The MPM images were evaluated by using the “analyze and measure” command in Image J software (National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD). Eosinophils were identified based on characteristics of fluorescent intensity, cell size, and cell shape. Cells that had dimensions ranging between 7 and 15 μm were included in the analysis.20Safdarian N. Liu Z. Wang T.D. et al.Identification of nasal eosinophils using two-photon excited fluorescence.Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2011; 106: 394-400Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar The mean and standard deviation of the fluorescence intensity of each cell and the surrounding squamous epithelium were measured. In addition, the size of each cell was recorded. Measurements were taken from 4 eosinophils and equivalent regions of epithelium in each specimen, if available. The maximum number of eosinophils per hpf were counted on the histology on viewing at 40× magnification. In addition, the absolute number of eosinophils on the MPM image were counted and compared with that found on histology. The 3D images were then generated using AutoQuantX2 (Media Cybernetics, Inc, Bethesda, MD) software. Vertical cross-sectional images were then obtained by taking a projection of the 3D image perpendicular to mucosal surface. An exponential fit of the average number of eosinophils versus mucosal depth was calculated using OriginPro 8.1 (OriginLab Corp., Northampton, MA). The histology was reviewed by a gastrointestinal pathologist (HA) who was blinded to the results of the MPM images. The pathologist reported if eosinophils were present, and if so, quantified the maximum number of eosinophils per hpf. Statistical significance (P-value) was calculated using the 2-sided Student t-test with unequal variance. All results are shown as mean values ± standard deviations. The relationship between eosinophil count on the MPM images and pathology evaluation was compared using linear regression. Statistical analysis was performed using the data analysis package in Microsoft Excel 2007. A total of 23 patients were recruited into this study with ages ranging from 21 to 64 years old (mean 42 ± 13), including 12 females and 11 males. The patient demographics, symptoms on presentation, therapy before the study, and cell count on MPM and histopathology are presented in Table 1.Table 1Demographics of Patients Included in Study, Presenting Symptoms, and Therapy at Time of Endoscopy, and Eosinophil Cell Count on Multiphoton Imaging⁎Absolute over volume of 775 × 775 × 200 μm3. and Pathology‡Maximum in hpf.AgeGenderPresenting SymptomsTherapyMultiphoton Absolute Eos#Pathology Max Eos#60FDysphagiaOmeprazole 40 mg bidDistal-13Distal-742MH/o impaction, stricture, dilationOmeprazole 20 mg prnNANA36MDysphagia, food impactionOmeprazole 20 mg qdNANA52FEoE on Flovent, dilation q3–4 moNoneDistal-13Distal-533MDysphagiaOmeprazole 20 mg bid, ranitidine 150 mg bid0053FGERD-likeOmeprazole 20 mg bid0060MH/o Barretts, suspected EoEOmeprazole 20 mg qdProximal-8, distal-12056FGERD-likeRanitidine 150 mg prnProximal-14064FGERD-like, family h/o EoENone0033FNew diagnosis of EoEOmeprazole 20 mg bidProximal-21, distal-20Proximal-16, distal-534MNew diagnosis of EoEOmeprazole 20 mg bidProximal-7, distal-15Proximal-4, distal-1321MDysphagiaNone0025MH/o EoE, GERD-like, dysphagiaOmeprazole 20 mg bidProximal-175233MH/o EoEPantoprazole 40 mg qdProximal-5024FGERD-likeOmeprazole 20 mg qd0043MEoE, dysphagiaOmeprazole 40 mg qdDistal-56Proximal-4, distal-2926FDysphagiaLansoprazole 30 mg qdProximal-4, distal-12059FDysphagia, GERD-likeOmeprazole 40 mg qdDistal-11049FGERD-likeOmeprazole 20 mg bidProximal-2, distal-5Distal-141FChest pain, GERD-likeOmeprazole 20 mg qdDistal-18Distal-1643MDysphagia, food impactionNoneProximal-159, distal-31Proximal-7, distal-6657FDysphagiaNoneProximal-6, distal-110Distal-442MDysphagiaNoneProximal-1, distal-10Distal-2 Absolute over volume of 775 × 775 × 200 μm3.‡ Maximum in hpf. Open table in a new tab Based on routine histopathologic review, eosinophils were found on 11 specimens. On MPM imaging, eosinophils were found on the same 11 specimens as well as on 5 additional specimens. In Figure 1, MPM images of esophageal mucosa collected in horizontal cross-sections (FOV 775 × 775 μm2) shows punctate regions of bright fluorescence from eosinophils (red arrows) infiltrating squamous epithelium, characterized by a diffuse and much dimmer pattern of fluorescence from the epithelium. Images are collected from the mucosal surface (d = 0 μm) and increase with depth in 20-μm increments (scale bar, 100 μm). In Figure 1G, the resulting 3D volume rendered image shows the distribution of eosinophils within the mucosa (scale bar, 400 μm). We were able to accurately identify and quantify the eosinophils on these MPM images using fresh, unstained, unfixed specimen, and observed significantly greater mean MPM intensity from the eosinophils in comparison to the surrounding epithelium. The average target-to-background ratio on the EoE positive images from a depth of d = 0 to 50 μm is 4.47 ± 4.34 (range, 1.38–31.14) and from d = 51 to 200 μm is 3.87 ± 2.76 (range, 1.94–15.59; P = .01). Vertical cross-sectional images (perpendicular to mucosal surface) show the distribution eosinophils with mucosal depth. These images are generated from the 3D volumetric images shown above. In Figure 1H, several eosinophils (yellow arrows) can be identified from the punctate regions of increased fluorescence intensity compared with that of the surrounding squamous epithelium (scale bar, 25 μm). The oval shape of the eosinophils result from processing performed to generate the vertical cross-sectional images. The corresponding histology (hematoxylin and eosin) in Figure 1I confirms the presence of eosinophils (black arrows). By comparison, a vertical cross-sectional image from a specimen of esophageal mucosa collected from a patient with no infiltrating eosinophils is shown in Figure 1J as a control. The corresponding histology (stain: hematoxylin and eosin) shown in Figure 1K confirms the absence of eosinophils. The average number of eosinophils on the positive specimens at different depths below the mucosal surface was found from the vertical cross-sectional images, and is shown in Figure 1L. The concentration of eosinophils seems to be highest near the mucosal surface, and decreases in approximately an exponential fashion with tissue depth down to approximately 200 μm. A fit of the average number of eosinophils as a function of depth to the equation n(D) = Ae−d/D, resulted in values of A = 17 and D = 62.5 μm. We found that, on the MPM images, 96% of the eosinophils present within the esophageal mucosa can be found within a 200-μm-thick layer below the surface. A direct comparison of eosinophil count versus depth on histology was limited by artifacts introduced by specimen processing. In Figure 2A, the number of eosinophils found on individual vertical cross-sectional MPM images with dimensions 775 μm wide by 200 μm deep is shown in horizontal increments of 20 μm across the mucosal surface of the esophageal specimen. The numbers ranged from 1 to 17 cells with an average of 7.95 ± 4.24 (horizontal black line). This result shows that any single section is unlikely to accurately represent the average number of cells over the volume of the specimen. Immunohistochemistry was performed to validate the source of the MPM signal. In Figure 2B, numerous discrete foci of bright (green) fluorescence can be seen in a horizontal cross-sectional MPM image of superficial squamous epithelium. In Figure 2C, a serial section of the epithelium stained with the anti-EPO primary and Alexa Fluor 594-labeled secondary antibodies reveals numerous eosinophils (red). The DAPI (blue) stain identifies cell nuclei. In Figure 2D, registration of the MPM and immunohistochemistry images is reflected by an overlay, supporting the assertion that the MPM signal originates from eosinophils within the surface epithelium of the esophagus (scale bar, 25 μm). Herein we have demonstrated the use of MPM imaging to identify and quantify eosinophils from esophageal mucosa. We found MPM to be sensitive to eosinophil autofluorescence from the mucosal surface to a depth of about 200 μm. The target-to-background ratio was sufficiently high to distinguish eosinophils from the surrounding squamous epithelium over this depth. The average number of eosinophils on MPM was found to follow a decaying exponential distribution with a 1/e depth of 62.5 μm, suggesting that most of the infiltrating eosinophils are located within the squamous epithelium. In addition, eosinophils on MPM were found in all of the specimens confirmed as positive on pathology as well as in 5 additional specimens that the pathologist considered negative. Individual MPM sections provide a representative view of the number of cells seen on conventional histopathology, and were found to have considerable variability over the same dimensions that could lead to diagnostic error or data misinterpretation. Quantifying the number of eosinophils over an epithelial volume of rather than in a single section may achieve greater accuracy and measurement repeatability for EoE diagnosis. These results support a future study that correlates eosinophil counts on MPM with severity and resolution of clinical EoE disease using different therapies. Currently, the diagnosis of EoE relies on a quantitative assessment of eosinophil cell count performed by a pathologist over a region of interest that is determined subjectively on tissue sections that are cut in an arbitrary orientation relative to the mucosal surface. In addition, the results reported are typically the maximum number seen rather than the absolute. Furthermore, clinical symptoms used to formulate this diagnosis can be nonspecific and difficult to distinguish from GERD.22Genevay M. Rubbia-Brandt L. Rougemont A.L. Do eosinophil numbers differentiate eosinophilic esophagitis from gastroesophageal reflux disease?.Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2010; 134: 815-825Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 23Spechler S.J. Genta R.M. Souza R.F. Thoughts on the complex relationship between gastroesophageal reflux disease and eosinophilic esophagitis.Am J Gastroenterol. 2007; 102: 1301-1306Crossref PubMed Scopus (286) Google Scholar Diagnostic accuracy and disease management can be greatly enhanced by establishing a standardized method for accurately measuring the number of eosinophils over a known tissue volume. The source of this intense MPM signal is believed to be FAD contained within eosinophil granules in high concentrations, distinguishing these cells from other mediators of inflammation, such as neutrophils, lymphocytes, and monocytes.20Safdarian N. Liu Z. Wang T.D. et al.Identification of nasal eosinophils using two-photon excited fluorescence.Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2011; 106: 394-400Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar Once diagnosed and treated, patient follow-up can be performed in an objective and consistent manner. This technique can be particularly useful when symptoms persist by providing better quantification of eosinophils to determine optimal therapeutic response and to determine whether future treatments will effectively reduce eosinophil count. MPM imaging represents a novel approach for evaluating EoE by performing an “optical biopsy” of the specimen in a nondestructive, label-free manner. We found that 700 nm was an effective wavelength for 2-photon excitation of the mucosal eosinophils based on our previous study.20Safdarian N. Liu Z. Wang T.D. et al.Identification of nasal eosinophils using two-photon excited fluorescence.Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2011; 106: 394-400Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (2) Google Scholar This result is consistent with the blue shift that has been observed in other studies as well.24Bestvater F. Spiess E. Stobrawa G. et al.Two-photon fluorescence absorption and emission spectra of dyes relevant for cell imaging.J Microsc. 2002; 208: 108-115Crossref PubMed Scopus (168) Google Scholar To address the focal and patchy nature of this disease, miniature 2-photon imaging instruments25Engelbrecht C.J. Johnston R.S. Seibel E.J. et al.Ultra-compact fiber-optic two-photon microscope for functional fluorescence imaging in vivo.Optics Express. 2008; 16: 5556-5564Crossref PubMed Scopus (231) Google Scholar, 26Bao H. Allen J. Pattie R. et al.Fast handheld two-photon fluorescence microendoscope with a 475 micron x 475 micron field of view for in vivo imaging.Opt Lett. 2008; 33: 1333-1335Crossref PubMed Scopus (90) Google Scholar, 27Zhao Y. Nakamura H. Gordon R.J. Development of a versatile two-photon endoscope for biological imaging.Biomed Opt Express. 2010; 1: 1159-1172Crossref PubMed Scopus (47) Google Scholar that are endoscope compatible are being developed to collect MPM images in vivo. Conventional endoscopy alone has been found to be inadequate to support either diagnosis or treatment of EoE.28Peery A.F. Cao H. Dominik R. et al.Variable reliability of endoscopic findings with white-light and narrow-band imaging for patients with suspected eosinophilic esophagitis.Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2011; 9: 475-480Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (59) Google Scholar Recently, an assessment of EoE has been demonstrated in vivo with confocal laser endomicroscopy.29Neumann H. Vieth M. Atreya R. et al.First description of eosinophilic esophagitis using confocal laser endomicroscopy (with video).Endoscopy. 2011; 43: E66Crossref PubMed Scopus (14) Google Scholar MPM imaging has potential to significantly improve tissue penetration depth and achieve 3D imaging with negligible risk of mutagenicity.30Dela Cruz J.M. McMullen J.D. Williams R.M. et al.Feasibility of using multiphoton excited tissue autofluorescence for in vivo human histopathology.Biomed Opt Express. 2010; 1: 1320-1330Crossref PubMed Scopus (39) Google Scholar MPM imaging is a novel and promising method for accurately detecting and quantifying eosinophils, and has potential to improve accuracy for disease detection and therapeutic monitoring. N.S. and Z.L. contributed equally to this work." @default.
• W1988342207 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W1988342207 creator A5024403479 @default.
• W1988342207 creator A5045973244 @default.
• W1988342207 creator A5053592727 @default.
• W1988342207 creator A5059736060 @default.
• W1988342207 creator A5078504833 @default.
• W1988342207 creator A5084272486 @default.
• W1988342207 creator A5091820170 @default.
• W1988342207 date "2012-01-01" @default.
• W1988342207 modified "2023-10-12" @default.
• W1988342207 title "Quantifying Human Eosinophils Using Three-Dimensional Volumetric Images Collected With Multiphoton Fluorescence Microscopy" @default.
• W1988342207 cites W1533974518 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W1990867071 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2005160345 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2014718984 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2019673899 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2033450633 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2034453465 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2038067852 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2040605890 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2040637481 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2048777505 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2056640154 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2061464631 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2068429932 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2070737749 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2074453308 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2077275658 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2078900266 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2081782457 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2100392590 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2101870314 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2128973236 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2129827453 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2147607085 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2155967670 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2161932153 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2312237589 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W2336019232 @default.
• W1988342207 cites W4238433513 @default.
• W1988342207 doi "https://doi.org/10.1053/j.gastro.2011.11.003" @default.
• W1988342207 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/3244565" @default.
• W1988342207 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22100819" @default.
• W1988342207 hasPublicationYear "2012" @default.
• W1988342207 type Work @default.
• W1988342207 sameAs 1988342207 @default.
• W1988342207 citedByCount "16" @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072012 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072013 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072014 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072015 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072017 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072018 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072019 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072020 @default.
• W1988342207 countsByYear W19883422072021 @default.
• W1988342207 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W1988342207 hasAuthorship W1988342207A5024403479 @default.
• W1988342207 hasAuthorship W1988342207A5045973244 @default.
• W1988342207 hasAuthorship W1988342207A5053592727 @default.
• W1988342207 hasAuthorship W1988342207A5059736060 @default.
• W1988342207 hasAuthorship W1988342207A5078504833 @default.
• W1988342207 hasAuthorship W1988342207A5084272486 @default.
• W1988342207 hasAuthorship W1988342207A5091820170 @default.
• W1988342207 hasBestOaLocation W19883422071 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C120665830 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C121332964 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C136229726 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C147080431 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C169274487 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C91881484 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConcept C99288877 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C120665830 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C121332964 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C136229726 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C147080431 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C169274487 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C192562407 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C71924100 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C91881484 @default.
• W1988342207 hasConceptScore W1988342207C99288877 @default.
• W1988342207 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W1988342207 hasLocation W19883422071 @default.
• W1988342207 hasLocation W19883422072 @default.
• W1988342207 hasLocation W19883422073 @default.
• W1988342207 hasLocation W19883422074 @default.
• W1988342207 hasOpenAccess W1988342207 @default.
• W1988342207 hasPrimaryLocation W19883422071 @default.
• W1988342207 hasRelatedWork W1534817517 @default.
• W1988342207 hasRelatedWork W1979797230 @default.
• W1988342207 hasRelatedWork W1999323150 @default.
• W1988342207 hasRelatedWork W2007543402 @default.
• W1988342207 hasRelatedWork W2016833938 @default.
• W1988342207 hasRelatedWork W2019935669 @default.
• W1988342207 hasRelatedWork W2088911899 @default.

• next