A subscription to JoVE is required to view this content. Sign in or start your free trial.
Method Article
Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) is a widely used method to characterize extracellular vesicles. This paper highlights NTA experimental parameters and controls plus a uniform method of analysis and characterization of samples and diluents necessary to supplement the guidelines proposed by MISEV2018 and EV-TRACK for reproducibility between laboratories.
Nanoparticle tracking analysis (NTA) has been one of several characterization methods used for extracellular vesicle (EV) research since 2006. Many consider that NTA instruments and their software packages can be easily utilized following minimal training and that size calibration is feasible in-house. As both NTA acquisition and software analysis constitute EV characterization, they are addressed in Minimal Information for Studies of Extracellular Vesicles 2018 (MISEV2018). In addition, they have been monitored by Transparent Reporting and Centralizing Knowledge in Extracellular Vesicle Research (EV-TRACK) to improve the robustness of EV experiments (e.g., minimize experimental variation due to uncontrolled factors).
Despite efforts to encourage the reporting of methods and controls, many published research papers fail to report critical settings needed to reproduce the original NTA observations. Few papers report the NTA characterization of negative controls or diluents, evidently assuming that commercially available products, such as phosphate-buffered saline or ultrapure distilled water, are particulate-free. Similarly, positive controls or size standards are seldom reported by researchers to verify particle sizing. The Stokes-Einstein equation incorporates sample viscosity and temperature variables to determine particle displacement. Reporting the stable laser chamber temperature during the entire sample video collection is, therefore, an essential control measure for accurate replication. The filtration of samples or diluents is also not routinely reported, and if so, the specifics of the filter (manufacturer, membrane material, pore size) and storage conditions are seldom included. The International Society for Extracellular Vesicle (ISEV)'s minimal standards of acceptable experimental detail should include a well-documented NTA protocol for the characterization of EVs. The following experiment provides evidence that an NTA analysis protocol needs to be established by the individual researcher and included in the methods of publications that use NTA characterization as one of the options to fulfill MISEV2018 requirements for single vesicle characterization.
Accurate and repeatable analysis of EVs and other nanometer-scaled particles presents numerous challenges across research and industry. Replication of EV research has been difficult, in part, due to the lack of uniformity in reporting necessary parameters associated with data collection. To address these deficiencies, the ISEV proposed industry guidelines as a minimal set of biochemical, biophysical, and functional standards for EV researchers and published them as a position statement, commonly referred to as MISEV20141. The accelerating pace of EV research required an updated guideline, and the "MISEV2018: a position statement of the ISEV" expanded the MISEV2014 guidelines2. The MISEV2018 paper included tables, outlines of suggested protocols, and steps to follow to document specific EV-associated characterization. As a further measure to facilitate interpretation and replication of experiments, EV-TRACK was developed as a crowd-sourcing knowledgebase (http://evtrack.org) to enable more transparent reporting of EV biology and the methodology used for published results3. Despite these recommendations for standardized reporting of methods, the field continues to suffer regarding replicating and confirming published results.
Fitting with the National Institutes of Health's and National Science Foundation's effort for quality assessment tools, this paper suggests that ISEV requires standardized reporting of methods and details so that data assessment tools might be applied with the goal of replicating results between laboratories. Reporting cell sources, cell culture procedures, and EV isolation methods are important factors to define the qualities of the EV population. Among NTA instruments, factors such as detection settings, the refractive index of carrier fluid, heterogeneous particle populations contributing to polydispersity, lack of standardized reporting requirements, and absent intra- and inter-observer measurement results make NTA comparison between labs difficult or impossible.
In use since 2006, NTA is a popular method for nanoparticle size and concentration determination that is currently used by approximately 80% of EV researchers4. The MISEV2018 Guidelines require two forms of single-vesicle analysis, of which NTA is one of the popular options. NTA continues to be in common use for EV characterization due to its wide accessibility, low cost per sample, and its straightforward founding theory (the Stokes-Einstein equation). EV assessment by NTA generates a particle size distribution and concentration estimate using laser light scattering and Brownian motion analysis, with the lower limit of detection determined by the refractive index of the EV. When using a fluid sample of known viscosity and temperature, the trajectories of the EVs are tracked to determine their mean-square displacement in two dimensions. This allows the particle diffusion coefficient to be calculated and converted into a sphere-equivalent hydrodynamic diameter by a modified Stokes-Einstein equation5,6,7. NTA's particle-to-particle analysis has less interference by agglomerates or larger particles in a heterogeneous population of EVs than other methods of characterization7. While a few larger particles have minimal impact on sizing accuracy, the presence of even minute amounts of large, high light-scattering particles results in a notable reduction in the detection of smaller particles due to reduced software EV detection and tracking8. As a measurement technique, NTA is generally considered not to be biased toward larger particles or aggregates of particles but can resolve multiple-sized populations through individual particle analysis9. Because of the use of light-scattering by particles, one of the limitations of NTA analysis is that any particulate such as dust, plastic, or powder with similar refraction and size attributes compared to EVs cannot be differentiated from actual EVs by this method of characterization.
The NanoSight LM10 (nanoparticle size analyzer) and LM14 (laser module) have been sold since 2006, and although newer models of this instrument have been developed, this particular model is found in many core facilities and is considered a reliable workhorse. Training is needed to properly optimize the NTA settings for high-resolution measurements of size and concentration. The two important settings needed for optimum video recordings are (1) the camera level and (2) the detection threshold. These must be set by the operator based on the sample's characteristics. One of the major constraints of NTA analysis is the recommendation of sample concentrations between 107 and 109 particles/mL, to achieve this sample dilution may be required10. Solutions used for dilution, such as phosphate-buffered saline, 0.15 M saline, or ultrapure water, are rarely free of particles less than 220 µm in size, which may affect the NTA measurements. NTA characterization of the solutions used for dilution should be performed at the same camera level and detection threshold as the nanoparticle samples that are being analyzed.The size and concentration of nanoparticles present in diluents used for EV sample dilutions are seldom included in publications involving NTA analysis of EVs.
This protocol uses NTA analysis of synthetic EV-like liposomes evaluated using selected camera levels, detection thresholds, and mechanical filtering of the samples to analyze the systematic effects of camera level, detection threshold, or sample filtration on the NTA dataset. Liposomes were synthesized as described in Supplemental File S1. Synthetic liposomes were used in this experiment because of their size uniformity, physical characteristics, and stability in storage at 4 °C. Although actual samples of EVs could have been used, the heterogenicity and stability of EVs during storage may have complicated this study and its interpretation. Similarities in the NTA reports from (A) liposomes and (B) EVs indicate that the systematic effects revealed for liposomes in this paper will likely also apply to EV characterization (Figure 1). Together, these findings support the notion that complete reporting of critical software settings and the description of sample processing, such as diluent, dilution, and filtration, impact the reproducibility of NTA data.
The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate that varying the NTA settings (temperature, camera level, and detection threshold) and sample preparation changes the results collected: systematic, significant differences in size and concentration were obtained. As NTA is one of the popular options to fulfill the MISEV2018 characterization specification, these results demonstrate the importance of reporting sample preparation and NTA settings to ensure reproducibility.
Figure 1: Representative NTA reports to compare liposomes to EVs. (A) Liposomes: unfiltered sample characterized on NTA on 12 March 2020. (B) EVs: unfiltered sample characterized on NTA on 26 August 2021. Abbreviations: NTA = Nanoparticle tracking analysis; EVs = extracellular vesicles. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
1. General protocol guidelines
2. Preparation of 50 nm and 100 nm size calibration standards
NOTE: See the Table of Materials.
3. Cleaning and assembly of the laser module
4. Flushing procedure for the laser module prior to and between samples
5. Placement of the laser module on the microscope stage
Figure 2: Laser module focus alignment guide. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
6. Focusing and positioning of the laser module
NOTE: This must be performed with fluid in the chamber.
7. Loading standards/samples/diluent into the laser module for NTA analysis
8. Validation of calibration
NOTE: It is recommended to validate the module calibration using size standards (see section 2) prior to sample analysis. Routine validation is necessary to ensure accurate measurements. In a multiuser laboratory, individual user adjustments of software configuration settings can inadvertently cause inaccurate data collection. For critical data collection, daily validation is a matter of good laboratory practice. The day-to-day reproducibility of validation needs to be included in the reported results. Typically, calibration is set by the technician and is not adjustable by the individual user unless the user has administrator access. This prevents unauthorized reconfiguration by individual users.
9. Optimizing sample concentration for NTA
NOTE: The screen should contain between 50 and 100 measurable particles when the camera level and sample concentration are adjusted properly. If there is any question about whether a sample has an appropriate particle number, a Quick Measurement can be run on the sample at this point (see steps 9.1 to 9.7). It is used to assess the sample characteristics rapidly prior to longer video captures. The Quick Measurement tab is found within the SOP tab in the bottom middle box.
10. Sample NTA
NOTE: The Standard Measurement tab is within the SOP tab in the bottom middle box and is used for routine sample analysis (see steps 10.1 to 10.12).
11. Re-analysis of the current sample at different detection thresholds
NOTE: Immediately following NTA analysis (step 10), the data can be reanalyzed using different Detection Threshold settings. However, Camera Level cannot be modified following capture.
12. Analysis of archived files
NOTE: If previously analyzed experiments have not been saved or additional analysis needs to be done on these samples, the individual files can be reloaded into the NTA software for additional Detection Threshold evaluations. Camera Level changes cannot be modified following capture.
13. Cleaning and disassembly of the laser module
14. Sample analysis protocol
15. Statistical analysis of NTA results
Table 1 contains the results of the NTA videos for the liposome samples (18 filtered and 18 unfiltered) and a representative DPBS diluent. Comparisons across the two groups were completed regardless of the camera level or detection threshold in this paper. Filtered samples had a mean particle diameter of 108.5 nm, a particle mode of 86.2 nm, and a concentration of 7.4 × 108 particles/mL. In contrast, unfiltered samples had a mean particle diameter of 159.1 nm, a particle mode of 105.7 nm,...
There are several methods available to estimate the size and concentration of nanoparticles11. These include ensemble methods that generate a size estimate from a population, including dynamic light scattering (DLS), centrifugal sedimentation, and single-particle level analysis-electron microscopy, NTA, atomic force microscopy, and tunable resistive pulse sensing. Of these, DLS and NTA are widely used, nondestructive size and concentration measurement methods, based on Brownian movement in an idea...
None of the authors have any conflicts of interest.
The work was supported by the state of Kansas to the Midwest Institute for Comparative Stem Cell Biology (MICSCB), the Johnson Cancer Research Center to MLW and NIH R21AG066488 to LKC. OLS received GRA support from the MICSCB. The authors thank Dr. Santosh Aryal for providing the liposomes used in this project and the members of the Weiss and Christenson laboratories for helpful conversations and feedback. Dr. Hong He is thanked for technical support. MLW thanks Betti Goren Weiss for her support and counsel.
Name | Company | Catalog Number | Comments |
Automatic Pipetter | |||
Centrifuge Tubes, Conical, Nunc 15 mL | Thermo Sci. | 339650 | |
Kimwipes | |||
Lens Cleaner | |||
Lens Paper | |||
NanoSight LM-10 | Malvern Panalytical | ||
NanoSight LM-14 Laser Module | Malvern Panalytical | ||
Nanosight NTA Software Ver. 3.2 | Malvern Panalytical | ||
Paper Towels | |||
Pipette Tips, 1-200 µL, Filtered, Sterile, Low Binding | BioExpress | P -3243-200X | |
Pipette Tips, 50-1,000 µL, Filtered, Sterile | BioExpress | P-3243-1250 | |
Saline, Dulbecco's Phosphate Buffered (No Ca or Mg) | Gibco | 14190-144 | |
Standards, Latex Transfer- 100 nm (3 mL) | Malvern | NTA4088 | |
Standards, Latex Transfer- 50 nm (3 mL) | Malvern | NTA4087 | |
Syringe Filter, 33 mm, .22 µm, MCE, Sterile | Fisher brand | 09-720-004 | |
Syringe, TB, 1 mL, slip tip | Becton Dickinson | 309659 | |
Waste fluid container |
Request permission to reuse the text or figures of this JoVE article
Request PermissionThis article has been published
Video Coming Soon
Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. All rights reserved