Impact of Isolation Techniques on the Content of Small Extracellular Vesicles

ABSTRACT An important topic of discussion amongst the extracellular vesicle (EV) research field is which genetic materials are considered true constituents of EV cargo. What were once regarded as non‐EV components have now evolved to be potentially essential to EV composition, serving as key mediators in communication. Researchers continue to pursue varying methods for the isolation of EVs with the desired content. However, the desired content depends on the source and the requirements of the intended downstream use of EVs. Different isolation methods can modify EV cargo, impacting functional EV‐induced effects and analysis of EV contents. Ensuring that any result produced is truly representative of EVs and not of co‐isolated materials is imperative. Here, we describe a side‐by‐side comparison of the outcomes of EV isolation from plasma of healthy individuals, using size exclusion chromatography and an ultrafast filtration system. Characterisation of EVs was performed by particle (nanoparticle tracking analysis), protein (Bradford assay) and lipid (sulfo‐phospho‐vanillin assay) quantification, morphology visualisation (transmission electron microscopy), microRNA expression (miRNA sequencing) and assessment of protein absence or presence (traditional and capillary‐based western blot analyses, ELISA and mass spectrometry). To our surprise, the isolation methods employed identified significant differences in the protein abundance and composition of the resulting EVs. SEC isolated plasma EVs with high abundance of EV transmembrane and cytosolic markers, as well as corona‐related complement, fibrinogen and extracellular matrix proteins. However, this was accompanied by high quantities of non‐EV immunoglobulins. In contrast, UFF isolated plasma EVs with high abundance of EV integrins and corona‐related complement proteins, albeit with high lipoprotein abundance. Each isolation approach produces EVs with different biomolecular properties, which might provide specific advantages and disadvantages, depending on the intended use of EVs. Therefore, isolation methods need to be tested intensively and selected carefully for downstream applications.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Extracellular Vesicles
Published
2026-05-28
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/jev2.70290
Primary Topic
Extracellular vesicles in disease
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact of Isolation Techniques on the Content of Small Extracellular Vesicles

Juntaro Matsuzaki, Kekoolani S. Visan, Marta Prieto‐Vila, Judy Wai Ping Yam et al.
Journal of Extracellular Vesicles
Extracellular vesicles in disease
article

Impact of Isolation Techniques on the Content of Small Extracellular Vesicles

Juntaro Matsuzaki, Kekoolani S. Visan, Marta Prieto‐Vila, Judy Wai Ping Yam, Jason Ying Kuen Chan, Yue Su, Andreas Möller, Sarah Voss
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT An important topic of discussion amongst the extracellular vesicle (EV) research field is which genetic materials are considered true constituents of EV cargo. What were once regarded as non‐EV components have now evolved to be potentially essential to EV composition, serving as key mediators in communication. Researchers continue to pursue varying methods for the isolation of EVs with the desired content. However, the desired content depends on the source and the requirements of the intended downstream use of EVs. Different isolation methods can modify EV cargo, impacting functional EV‐induced effects and analysis of EV contents. Ensuring that any result produced is truly representative of EVs and not of co‐isolated materials is imperative. Here, we describe a side‐by‐side comparison of the outcomes of EV isolation from plasma of healthy individuals, using size exclusion chromatography and an ultrafast filtration system. Characterisation of EVs was performed by particle (nanoparticle tracking analysis), protein (Bradford assay) and lipid (sulfo‐phospho‐vanillin assay) quantification, morphology visualisation (transmission electron microscopy), microRNA expression (miRNA sequencing) and assessment of protein absence or presence (traditional and capillary‐based western blot analyses, ELISA and mass spectrometry). To our surprise, the isolation methods employed identified significant differences in the protein abundance and composition of the resulting EVs. SEC isolated plasma EVs with high abundance of EV transmembrane and cytosolic markers, as well as corona‐related complement, fibrinogen and extracellular matrix proteins. However, this was accompanied by high quantities of non‐EV immunoglobulins. In contrast, UFF isolated plasma EVs with high abundance of EV integrins and corona‐related complement proteins, albeit with high lipoprotein abundance. Each isolation approach produces EVs with different biomolecular properties, which might provide specific advantages and disadvantages, depending on the intended use of EVs. Therefore, isolation methods need to be tested intensively and selected carefully for downstream applications.

Journal of Extracellular VesiclesVol. 15(6)
Queensland University of Technology (AU), Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK), Keio University (JP), QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute (AU), Institut de Recherche et d’Innovation (FR), University of Hong Kong (HK)
QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Cancer Australia, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Government
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Extracellular vesicles in disease
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.