We have located links that may give you full text access.
Comparison of RNA Extraction Methods for Molecular Analysis of Oral Cytology.
Acta Stomatologica Croatica 2016 June
OBJECTIVE OF WORK: The aim of this study was to compare three methods of RNA extraction for molecular analysis of oral cytology to establish the best technique, considering its concentration and purity for molecular tests of oral lesions such as real-time reverse transcriptase reaction.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample included exfoliative cytology from the oral cavity mucosa of patients with no visible clinical changes, using Orcellex Rovers Brush® . The extraction of total RNA was performed using the following three techniques: 30 samples were extracted by Trizol® technique, 30 by the Direct-zolTM RNA Miniprep system and 30 by the RNeasy mini Kit. The absorbance was measured by spectrophotometer to estimate the purity. The estimated RNA concentration was obtained by multiplying the value of A260 (ng/mL) by 40. Statistical analysis of the obtained data was performed using GraphPad Prism 5.03 software with Student t, analysis of variance and Bonferroni tests, considering p ≤0.05.
RESULTS: Trizol® group revealed higher average concentration, followed by Direct-zolTM and Rneasy group. It was observed that the RNA Direct-zolTM group had the highest purity, followed by RNeasy and Trizol® groups, allowing for the two ratios.
CONCLUSION: Considering all aspects, concentration, purity and time spent in the procedures, the Direct-zolTM group showed the best results.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample included exfoliative cytology from the oral cavity mucosa of patients with no visible clinical changes, using Orcellex Rovers Brush® . The extraction of total RNA was performed using the following three techniques: 30 samples were extracted by Trizol® technique, 30 by the Direct-zolTM RNA Miniprep system and 30 by the RNeasy mini Kit. The absorbance was measured by spectrophotometer to estimate the purity. The estimated RNA concentration was obtained by multiplying the value of A260 (ng/mL) by 40. Statistical analysis of the obtained data was performed using GraphPad Prism 5.03 software with Student t, analysis of variance and Bonferroni tests, considering p ≤0.05.
RESULTS: Trizol® group revealed higher average concentration, followed by Direct-zolTM and Rneasy group. It was observed that the RNA Direct-zolTM group had the highest purity, followed by RNeasy and Trizol® groups, allowing for the two ratios.
CONCLUSION: Considering all aspects, concentration, purity and time spent in the procedures, the Direct-zolTM group showed the best results.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app