2008
DOI: 10.1016/j.micron.2006.12.003
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Focused ion beam/scanning electron microscopy characterization of cell behavior on polymer micro-/nanopatterned substrates: A study of cell–substrate interactions

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
41
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 60 publications
(48 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
0
41
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Exploring such continuous layer-by-layer sectioning in real time regime, it is possible to obtain information about internal three-dimensional structure of different polymer objects, as it is routinely applied for sectioning of biopolymer cellular organelles. [6] Modern SEM devices are widely applied in studies of polymer nanostructures, e.g., of microphase separation domains in thin and ultrathin block copolymer films, due to high spatial resolution together with the possibility to eliminate sputtering by conductive material and thus to preserve original surface structure to be visualised. In ref.…”
Section: Comparison With Scanning Electron Microscopy (Sem)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Exploring such continuous layer-by-layer sectioning in real time regime, it is possible to obtain information about internal three-dimensional structure of different polymer objects, as it is routinely applied for sectioning of biopolymer cellular organelles. [6] Modern SEM devices are widely applied in studies of polymer nanostructures, e.g., of microphase separation domains in thin and ultrathin block copolymer films, due to high spatial resolution together with the possibility to eliminate sputtering by conductive material and thus to preserve original surface structure to be visualised. In ref.…”
Section: Comparison With Scanning Electron Microscopy (Sem)mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our study is comparable with findings that have been described previously when FIB/SEM techniques were used to analyze such cell-to-surface interfaces. [20,32] Both groups used slightly different sample preparation techniques: critical point-dried and freeze-dried, respectively, but obtained very similar image quality and detail structures. In particular, when cellto-substrate interfaces of cell monolayers cultured on glass or metal surface were analyzed, surface damage due to uncontrollable Gallium-ion implementation, amorphization, material deposition, melting of material ( [29] and references therein) could be neglected whereas the so called ''curtain effect'' was observable (here: especially in Fig.…”
Section: B185mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Very few studies address this topic using critical point-dried or freeze-dried cells on flat surfaces. [20,32] These studies demonstrated specifically selected sub-cellular structures for detailed characterization at the submicron scale by in situ high precision milling. [20,32] Here, we compare visualization of the cell-to material interface by conventional TEM sample preparation of neuronal networks cultured on a flat metal surface with resin-embedded in situ cross sections performed by FIB-milling.…”
mentioning
confidence: 95%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These studies include elemental analysis [13] and preparation of samples for TEM. Study of interfaces between implants and other biological material (cells, tissue, bone) make up another major category [e.g 14,15,16,17], and the effect of nanoparticles on cells is also being studied [18]. Examples of the wide variety of biological specimens studied with the aid of FIB include yeast [4], chromosomes [19], atherosclerotic tissue [20], brain [7], and other organs [21].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%