Comprehensive Physiology Wiley Online Library
For Librarians For Authors Editors About

Micropuncture of the Kidney: A Primer on Techniques

John N. Lorenz

10.1002/cphy.c110035

Source: Volume 2, Issue 1, January 2012

Published online: January 2012

Full Article on Wiley Online Library



Abstract

Techniques to evaluate renal function at the single nephron level have been instrumental and indispensible in furthering our understanding of the mammalian kidney. Techniques that were first introduce in the 1920s, and later refined in the 1950s and 1960s, permit sophisticated interrogation of glomerular filtration and hemodynamics, and tubular epithelial transport activity. Much of what we know about the physiology and pathophysiology of the kidney has been produced or, to some degree, confirmed by renal micropuncture. While micropuncture is perhaps not as widely employed as before, it remains an essential tool for comprehensive evaluation of kidney function, particularly in this age of genetically pliable experimental models. This review aims to provide a introduction to common methodologies and approaches used to conduct micropuncture experiments. Topics covered include instrumentation and equipment, pipet fabrication techniques, animal preparation, and experimental procedures for evaluating single nephron hemodynamics and tubular function. © 2012 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 2:621‐637, 2012.

Comprehensive Physiology offers downloadable PowerPoint presentations of figures for non-profit, educational use, provided the content is not modified and full credit is given to the author and publication.

Download a PowerPoint presentation of all images


Figure 1. Figure 1.

Custom grinding station for beveling micropuncture pipets. Dissecting microscope is mounted horizontally so as to observe the grinding of the pipet tip at an oblique angle. The grinding wheel is a modified computer hard drive with the cover removed, and the disk is covered with a fine‐grit abrasive film [(A) 0.3 μm grit, Thomas Scientific]. The disk spins at a high rate (4,200 rpm) and is very flat. The pipet is mounted in a holder (B), and is lowered slowly onto the surface of the spinning disk using a fine micrometer (C). The pipet is illuminated from behind (D), and the wheel is lubricated with a constant water drip (E).
Figure 2. Figure 2.

Examples of different pipets made for renal micropuncture. The wax block pipet has a large opening to allow injection of the viscous wax, and to vent the upstream segment if necessary. Sample collection pipets are usually finely tapered and range in diameter from 5 to 15 μm; this pipet is suitable for a distal tubular collection. Pressure pipets have very fine tip diameters of 2 to 3 μm; the shank is generally finally tapered for a short distance and then steeply tapered to minimize electrical resistance. The filament on the lumen wall of the pressure pipet can be seen.
Figure 3. Figure 3.

Completed micropuncture setup for mouse, which is positioned on the heated table in a right lateral decubitus lie to expose the left flank, with head to the right and tail to the left. Left kidney is immobilized in a Lucite cup anchored from the rear, and is illuminated with a fiber optic light source from the front. The Leitz manipulator on the left is holding the marking pipet, and the Leitz manipulator on the right is holding the pressure pipet. The wax‐block/paraffin press can be seen behind the pressure pipet and is attached to a Narishige hydraulic manipulator with controller at the far lower right.
Figure 4. Figure 4.

Surface of a Munich‐Wistar rat kidney prepared for micropuncture measurement. The pipet, at right, has been inserted into a surface glomerulus (G), and dyed artificial tubular fluid has been injected and allowed to flow downstream; in this image, the dye fills part of the late proximal labyrinth, and the last surface loop of the proximal tubule is identified (LP). Adapted, with permission, from Vallon V. Micropuncturing the nephron. Pflügers Archiv European Journal of Physiology 458: 189‐201, 2009.
Figure 5. Figure 5.

Pipet configuration for fluid collections from the proximal and distal tubules, and from the peritubular capillary (star vessel). Pipets for fluid collections are back‐filled with stained oil, and a mobile oil block is inserted into the tubule before aspiration of tubular fluid begins in a timed collection. Fluid segments can be identified using a marking pipet to inject dyed fluid and allowing it to flow downstream. GFR can be measured by analyzing inulin concentration in fluid and plasma. The capillary pipette is filled with stained oil to prevent evaporation and to aid visualization, but a block is not inserted since the blood is not collected quantitatively. (Artwork in this and following figures, with permission, by W. H. Beierwaltes).
Figure 6. Figure 6.

Arrangement for efficient transfer and handling of micropuncture samples. On the right, the sampling pipet is mounted in a holder on a micromanipulator that allows adjustment in three axes. On the left, oil‐filled microcaps (1 μl) are positioned on a modified microscope stage to also allow for movement in three axes. Under a dissecting microscope, the pipet tip is advanced into the column of oil (here stained with Oil Red‐O dye), and pressure applied to expel the micropuncture sample into the oil column (see inset). This sample is approximately 30 nl.
Figure 7. Figure 7.

Pipet configuration for proximal tubule microperfusion. The upstream segment is blocked with wax, and an oil block is injected downstream for quantitative collection, while perfusing the intervening segment with artificial tubular fluid.
Figure 8. Figure 8.

Pipet configuration for analysis of tubuloglomerular feedback by orthograde perfusion of the loop of Henle. An early proximal segment is blocked with wax, and pressure is measured upstream while perfusing the loop of Henle at varying rates. As alternative to pressure measurement, early proximal flow rate or SNGFR can be measured.
Figure 9. Figure 9.

Pipet configuration for analysis of tubuloglomerular feedback by retrograde perfusion of the loop of Henle. The nephron is blocked at proximal and distal sites, and pressure is measured upstream as in Figure 8. The loop of Henle is perfused from the distal segment with fluid of varying ionic composition, directing flow proximally.
Figure 10. Figure 10.

Pipet configuration for analysis of tubuloglomerular feedback using the closed‐loop approach. Native tubular flow is not blocked and is evaluated videometrically by injecting fluorescent dye pulses upstream and interrogating transit time in a downstream segment. Changes in flow rate to the loop of Henle are imposed by injecting or aspirating fluid to or from a late proximal site.


Figure 1.

Custom grinding station for beveling micropuncture pipets. Dissecting microscope is mounted horizontally so as to observe the grinding of the pipet tip at an oblique angle. The grinding wheel is a modified computer hard drive with the cover removed, and the disk is covered with a fine‐grit abrasive film [(A) 0.3 μm grit, Thomas Scientific]. The disk spins at a high rate (4,200 rpm) and is very flat. The pipet is mounted in a holder (B), and is lowered slowly onto the surface of the spinning disk using a fine micrometer (C). The pipet is illuminated from behind (D), and the wheel is lubricated with a constant water drip (E).



Figure 2.

Examples of different pipets made for renal micropuncture. The wax block pipet has a large opening to allow injection of the viscous wax, and to vent the upstream segment if necessary. Sample collection pipets are usually finely tapered and range in diameter from 5 to 15 μm; this pipet is suitable for a distal tubular collection. Pressure pipets have very fine tip diameters of 2 to 3 μm; the shank is generally finally tapered for a short distance and then steeply tapered to minimize electrical resistance. The filament on the lumen wall of the pressure pipet can be seen.



Figure 3.

Completed micropuncture setup for mouse, which is positioned on the heated table in a right lateral decubitus lie to expose the left flank, with head to the right and tail to the left. Left kidney is immobilized in a Lucite cup anchored from the rear, and is illuminated with a fiber optic light source from the front. The Leitz manipulator on the left is holding the marking pipet, and the Leitz manipulator on the right is holding the pressure pipet. The wax‐block/paraffin press can be seen behind the pressure pipet and is attached to a Narishige hydraulic manipulator with controller at the far lower right.



Figure 4.

Surface of a Munich‐Wistar rat kidney prepared for micropuncture measurement. The pipet, at right, has been inserted into a surface glomerulus (G), and dyed artificial tubular fluid has been injected and allowed to flow downstream; in this image, the dye fills part of the late proximal labyrinth, and the last surface loop of the proximal tubule is identified (LP). Adapted, with permission, from Vallon V. Micropuncturing the nephron. Pflügers Archiv European Journal of Physiology 458: 189‐201, 2009.



Figure 5.

Pipet configuration for fluid collections from the proximal and distal tubules, and from the peritubular capillary (star vessel). Pipets for fluid collections are back‐filled with stained oil, and a mobile oil block is inserted into the tubule before aspiration of tubular fluid begins in a timed collection. Fluid segments can be identified using a marking pipet to inject dyed fluid and allowing it to flow downstream. GFR can be measured by analyzing inulin concentration in fluid and plasma. The capillary pipette is filled with stained oil to prevent evaporation and to aid visualization, but a block is not inserted since the blood is not collected quantitatively. (Artwork in this and following figures, with permission, by W. H. Beierwaltes).



Figure 6.

Arrangement for efficient transfer and handling of micropuncture samples. On the right, the sampling pipet is mounted in a holder on a micromanipulator that allows adjustment in three axes. On the left, oil‐filled microcaps (1 μl) are positioned on a modified microscope stage to also allow for movement in three axes. Under a dissecting microscope, the pipet tip is advanced into the column of oil (here stained with Oil Red‐O dye), and pressure applied to expel the micropuncture sample into the oil column (see inset). This sample is approximately 30 nl.



Figure 7.

Pipet configuration for proximal tubule microperfusion. The upstream segment is blocked with wax, and an oil block is injected downstream for quantitative collection, while perfusing the intervening segment with artificial tubular fluid.



Figure 8.

Pipet configuration for analysis of tubuloglomerular feedback by orthograde perfusion of the loop of Henle. An early proximal segment is blocked with wax, and pressure is measured upstream while perfusing the loop of Henle at varying rates. As alternative to pressure measurement, early proximal flow rate or SNGFR can be measured.



Figure 9.

Pipet configuration for analysis of tubuloglomerular feedback by retrograde perfusion of the loop of Henle. The nephron is blocked at proximal and distal sites, and pressure is measured upstream as in Figure 8. The loop of Henle is perfused from the distal segment with fluid of varying ionic composition, directing flow proximally.



Figure 10.

Pipet configuration for analysis of tubuloglomerular feedback using the closed‐loop approach. Native tubular flow is not blocked and is evaluated videometrically by injecting fluorescent dye pulses upstream and interrogating transit time in a downstream segment. Changes in flow rate to the loop of Henle are imposed by injecting or aspirating fluid to or from a late proximal site.

References
 1. Abu‐Amarah I, Ajikobi DO, Bachelard H, Cupples WA, Salevsky FC. Responses of mesenteric and renal blood flow dynamics to acute denervation in anesthetized rats. Am J Physiol 275: R1543‐R1552, 1998.
 2. Araujo M, Welch WJ. Cyclooxygenase 2 inhibition suppresses tubuloglomerular feedback: Roles of thromboxane receptors and nitric oxide. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 296: F790‐F794, 2009.
 3. Ashworth SL, Sandoval RM, Tanner GA, Molitoris BA. Two‐photon microscopy: Visualization of kidney dynamics. Kidney Int 72: 416‐421, 2007.
 4. Ashworth SL, Tanner GA. Fluorescent labeling of renal cells in vivo. Nephron Physiol 103: p91‐p96, 2006.
 5. Atkins JL, Vurek GG. Construction and filling of long‐shank micro pH electrodes. Pflügers Arch 400: 203‐204, 1984.
 6. Bishop JH, Green R, Thomas S. Effects of glucose on water and sodium reabsorption in the proximal convoluted tubule of rat kidney. J Physiol 275: 481‐493, 1978.
 7. Bomsztyk K, Calalb MB, Smith L, Stanton TH. A microelectrometric titration method for measurement of total intracellular Cl‐ concentration. Am J Physiol 254: C200‐C205 1988
 8. Boulpaep EL. Electrophysiological techniques in kidney micropuncture. Yale J Biol Med 45: 397‐413, 1972.
 9. Brenner BM, Falchuk KH, Keimowitz RI, Berliner RW. The relationship between peritubular capillary protein concentration and fluid reabsorption by the renal proximal tubule. J Clin Invest 48: 1519‐1531, 1969.
 10. Brenner BM, Troy JL, Daugharty TM. The dynamics of glomerular ultrafiltration in the rat. J Clin Invest 50: 1776‐1780, 1971.
 11. Brenner BM, Troy JL, Daugharty TM, Deen WM, Robertson CR. Dynamics of glomerular ultrafiltration in the rat. II. Plasma‐flow dependence of GFR. Am J Physiol 223: 1184‐1190, 1972.
 12. Brenner BM, Ueki IF, Daugharty TM. On estimating colloid osmotic pressure in pre‐ and postglomerular plasma in the rat. Kidney Int 2: 51‐53, 1972.
 13. Bulger RE. X‐ray microanalysis of the kidney. Scan Electron Microsc 1980: 511‐516, 1980.
 14. Chou CL, Marsh DJ. Measurement of flow rate in rat proximal tubules with a nonobstructing optical method. Am J Physiol 253: F366‐F371, 1987.
 15. Davidman M, Lalone RC, Alexander EA, Levinsky NG. Some micropuncture techniques in the rat. Am J Physiol 221: 1110‐1114, 1971.
 16. Davis JM, Schnermann J, Horster M. Micropuncture method for the determination of nephron filtration rate. A recollection study. Pflügers Arch 333: 271‐280, 1972.
 17. Deen WM, Robertson CR, Brenner BM. A model of glomerular ultrafiltration in the rat. Am J Physiol 223: 1178‐1183, 1972.
 18. Dunn KW, Sandoval RM, Kelly KJ, Dagher PC, Tanner GA, Atkinson SJ, Bacallao RL, Molitoris BA. Functional studies of the kidney of living animals using multicolor two‐photon microscopy. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 283: C905‐C916, 2002.
 19. Frömter E. Viewing the kidney through microelectrodes. Am J Physiol 247: F695‐F705 1984
 20. Frömter E. Electrophysiological analysis of rat renal sugar and amino acid transport. I. Basic phenomena. Pflugers Arch 393: 179‐189, 1982.
 21. Frömter E, Hegel U. Transtubuläre Potentialdifferenzen an proximalen und distalen Tubuli der Rattenniere. Pflügers Arch Gesamte Physiol Menschen Tiere 291: 107‐120, 1966.
 22. Fujimoto M, Kubota T. Physicochemical properties of a liquid ion exchanger microelectrode and its application to biological fluids. Jpn J Physiol 26: 631‐650, 1976.
 23. Garvin JL. A simple method to determine millimolar concentrations of sodium in nanoliter samples. Kidney Int 44: 875‐880, 1993.
 24. Gertz KH. Transtubuläre Natriumchloridflüsse und Permeabilität für Nichtelektrolyte im proximalen und distalen Konvolut der Rattenniere. Pflügers Arch Gesamte Physiol Menschen Tiere 276: 336‐356, 1962.
 25. Gertz KH. Stationary perfusion methods. Yale J Biol Med 45: 265‐268, 1972.
 26. Gertz KH, Mangos JA, Braun G, Pagel HD. On the glomerular tubular balance in the rat kidney. Pflügers Arch Gesamte Physiol Menschen Tiere 285: 360‐372, 1965.
 27. Good DW, Vurek GG. Picomole quantitation of ammonia by flow‐through fluorometry. Anal Biochem 130: 199‐202, 1983.
 28. Gottschalk CW, Mylle M. Micropuncture study of the mammalian urinary concentrating mechanism: Evidence for the countercurrent hypothesis. Am J Physiol 196: 927‐936, 1959.
 29. Gutsche HU, Muller‐Surr R, Hegel U, Hierholzer K, Luderitz S. A new method for intratubular blockade in micropuncture experiments. Pflügers Arch 354: 197‐202, 1975.
 30. Gutsche HU, Muller‐Suur R, Hegel U, Hierholzer K. Electrical conductivity of tubular fluid of the rat nephron. Micropuncture study of the diluting segment in situ. Pflugers Arch 383: 113‐121, 1980.
 31. Hansell P, Sadowski J, Sjoquist M, Ulfendahl HR. A method for in situ measurement of ionic concentration in picoliter samples of renal tubular fluid. Pflügers Arch 401: 430‐432, 1984.
 32. Harris PJ, Cullinan M, Thomas D, Morgan TO. Digital image capture and analysis for split‐drop micropuncture. Pflügers Arch 408: 615‐618, 1987.
 33. Holstein‐Rathlou NH. A closed‐loop analysis of the tubuloglomerular feedback mechanism. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 261: F880‐F889, 1991.
 34. Holstein‐Rathlou NH. Dynamic aspects of the tubuloglomerular feedback mechanism. Dan Med Bull 39: 134‐154, 1992.
 35. Jamison RL, Bennett CM, Berliner RW. Countercurrent multiplication by the thin loops of Henle. Am J Physiol 212: 357‐366, 1967.
 36. Le Grimellec C, Poujeol P, De Rouffignac C. 3H‐Inulin and electrolyte concentrations in Bowman's capsule in rat kidney. Pflügers Arch 354: 117‐131, 1975.
 37. Lorenz JN, Gruenstein E. A simple, nonradioactive method for evaluating single‐nephron filtration rate using FITC‐inulin. Am J Physiol 276: F172‐F177, 1999.
 38. Loutzenhiser R, Griffin K, Williamson G, Bidani A. Renal autoregulation: new perspectives regarding the protective and regulatory roles of the underlying mechanisms. Am J Physiol Regul Integr Comp Physiol 290: R1153‐R1167, 2006.
 39. Malnic G, Vieira FL. The antimony microelectrode in kidney micropuncture. Yale J Biol Med 45: 356‐367, 1972.
 40. Mason J, Moore LC. A new way of investigating tubuloglomerular feedback: The closed‐loop mode. Kidney Int Suppl 12: 151‐156, 1982.
 41. Moore LC, Mason J. Perturbation analysis of tubuloglomerular feedback in hydropenic and hemorrhaged rats. Am J Physiol 245: F554‐F563, 1983.
 42. Moore LC, Rich A, Casellas D. Ascending myogenic autoregulation: Interactions between tubuloglomerular feedback and myogenic mechanisms. Bull Math Biol 56: 391‐410, 1994.
 43. Ohno Y, Birn H, Christensen EI. In vivo confocal laser scanning microscopy and micropuncture in intact rat. Nephron Exp Nephrol 99: e17‐e25, 2005.
 44. Oliverio MI, Best CF, Kim HS, Arendshorst WJ, Smithies O, Coffman TM. Angiotensin II responses in AT1A receptor‐deficient mice: A role for AT1B receptors in blood pressure regulation. Am J Physiol 272: F515‐F520 1997
 45. Prager DJ, Bowman RL, Vurek GG. Constant volume, self‐filling nanoliter pipette: Construction and calibration. Science 147: 606‐608, 1965.
 46. Ramsay JA, Brown RH, Croghan PC. Electrometric titration of chloride in small volumes. J Exp Biol 32: 822‐829, 1955.
 47. Rieg T, Richter K, Osswald H, Vallon V. Kidney function in mice: Thiobutabarbital versus alpha‐chloralose anesthesia. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol 370: 320‐323, 2004.
 48. Robertson CR, Deen WM, Troy JL, Brenner BM. Dynamics of glomerular ultrafiltration in the rat. III. Hemodynamics and autoregulation. Am J Physiol 223: 1191‐1200, 1972.
 49. Schnermann J, Davis JM, Wunderlich P, Levine DZ, Horster M. Technical problems in the micropuncture determination of nephron filtration rate and their functional implications. Pflügers Arch 329: 307‐320, 1971.
 50. Schnermann J, Horster M, Levine DZ. The influence of sampling technique on the micropuncture determination of GFR and reabsorptive characteristics of single rat proximal tubules. Pflügers Arch 309: 48‐58, 1969.
 51. Schnermann J, Persson AEG, Ågerup B. Tubuloglomerular feedback: Nonlinear relation between glomerular hydrostatic pressure and loop of Henle perfusion rate. J Clin Invest 52: 862‐869, 1973.
 52. Schnermann J, Ploth DW, Hermle M. Activation of tubulo‐glomerular feedback by chloride transport. Pflugers Arch 362: 229‐240, 1976.
 53. Schnermann J, Schubert G, Briggs J. Tubuloglomerular feedback responses with native and artificial tubular fluid. Am J Physiol 250: F16‐F21, 1986.
 54. Schnermann J, Traynor T, Yang T, Arend L, Huang YG, Smart A, Briggs JP. Tubuloglomerular feedback: New concepts and developments. Kidney Int Suppl 67: S40‐S45, 1998.
 55. Schnermann J, Wright FS, Davis JM, Stackelberg Wv, Grill G. Regulation of superficial nephron filtration rate by tubulo‐glomerular feedback. Pflügers Arch 318: 147‐175, 1970.
 56. Sohtell M. Electrochemical forces for chloride transport in the proximal tubules of the rat kidney. Acta Physiol Scand 103: 363‐369, 1978.
 57. Sonnenberg H, Cheema‐Dhadli S, Goldstein MB, Stinebaugh BJ, Wilson DR, Halperin ML. Ammonia addition into the medullary collecting duct of the rat. Kidney Int 19: 281‐287, 1981.
 58. Steinhausen M, Endlich K. Controversies on glomerular filtration from Ludwig to the present. Pflugers Arch 432: R73‐R81, 1996.
 59. Tanner GA, Sandoval RM, Molitoris BA, Bamburg JR, Ashworth SL. Micropuncture gene delivery and intravital two‐photon visualization of protein expression in rat kidney. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 289: F638‐F643, 2005.
 60. Thomson SC, Blantz RC. Homeostatic efficiency of tubuloglomerular feedback in hydropenia, euvolemia, and acute volume expansion. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol 264: F930‐F936, 1993.
 61. Thomson SC, Blantz RC. Biophysical Basis of Glomerular Filtration. In: Alpern RJ, Herbert SC, editors. Seldin and Giebisch's The Kidney (4th ed.). San Diego: Academic Press, 2008, p. 565‐587.
 62. Thurau K, Schnermann J. Die Natriumkonzentration an den Macula densa‐Zellen als regulierender Faktor für das Glomerulumfiltrat (Mikropunktionsversuche). Klin Wochenschr 43: 410‐413, 1965a.
 63. Thurau K, Schnermann J. [ the Sodium Concentration in the Macula Densa Cells as a Regulating Factor for Glomerular Filtration (Micropuncture Experiments).]. Klin Wochenschr 43: 410‐413, 1965b.
 64. Vurek GG. Emission photometry of picomoles of calcium, magnesium, and other metals. Anal Chem 39: 1599‐1601, 1967.
 65. Vurek GG. Calcium measurement: Picomole quantitation by continuous‐flow colorimetry. Anal Biochem 114: 288‐293, 1981a.
 66. Vurek GG. Flow‐through nanocolorimeter for measurement of picomole amounts of magnesium and phosphate. Anal Lett 14: 261‐269, 1981b.
 67. Vurek GG. Nanoliter‐volume flow‐through fluorometer. Analytical Chemistry 54: 840‐842, 1982.
 68. Vurek GG, Bennett CM, Jamison RL, Troy JL. An air‐driven micropipette sharpener. J Appl Physiol 22: 191‐192, 1967.
 69. Vurek GG, Bowman RL. Helium‐glow photometer for picomole analysis of alkali metals. Science 149: 448‐450, 1965.
 70. Vurek GG, Knepper MA. A colorimeter for measurement of picomole quantities of urea. Kidney Int 21: 656‐658, 1982.
 71. Vurek GG, Pegram SE. Fluorometric method for the determination of nanogram quantities of inulin. Anal Biochem 16: 409‐419, 1966.
 72. Vurek GG, Warnock DG, Corsey R. Measurement of picomole amounts of carbon dioxide by calorimetry. Anal Chem 47: 765‐767, 1975.
 73. Walker AM, Bott PA, Oliver J, MacDowell MC. The collection and analysis of fluid from single nephrons of the mammalian kidney. Am J Physiol 134: 580‐595, 1941.
 74. Walker AM, Oliver J. Methods for the collection of fluid from single glomeruli and tubules of the mammalian kidney. Am J Physiol 134: 562‐579, 1941.
 75. Walker JL. Ion selective electrode measurements. Methods Enzymol 56: 359‐368, 1979.
 76. Wang T, Agulian SK, Giebisch G, Aronson PS. Effects of formate and oxalate on chloride absorption in rat distal tubule. Am J Physiol 264: F730‐F736, 1993.
 77. Wearn JT, Richards AN. Observations on the composition of glomerular urine, with particular reference to the problem of reabsorption in the renal tubules. Am J Physiol 71: 209‐227, 1924.
 78. Wright F. Increasing magnitude of electrical potential along the renal distal tubule. Am J Physiol 220: 624‐638, 1971.
 79. Zhelyaskov VR, Liu S, Broderick MP. Analysis of nanoliter samples of electrolytes using a flow‐through microfluorometer. Kidney Int 57: 1764‐1769, 2000.

Drafting of this article drew heavily on previous chapters on micropuncture in the Handbook of Physiology: Renal Physiology.  These previous chapters offer numerous insights regarding the methodology and evolution of this valuable experimental approach.

Gottschalk CW and Lassiter WE. Micropuncture methodology. In: Handbook of Physiology: Renal Physiology, edited by Orloff J and Berliner RW. Washington: American Physiological Society, 1973, p. 129-143.

Velazquez H and Wright FS. Renal micropuncture techniques. In: Handbook of Physiology: Renal Physiology, edited by Windhager EE. New York: Oxford University Press for the American Physiological Society, 1973, p. 249-269.

A more recent review discussing modern micropuncture techniques is also excellent.

Vallon V. Micropuncturing the nephron. Pflügers Archiv European Journal of Physiology 458: 189-201, 2009.

Supplementary Information

Instrument Manufacturers

 

ADInstruments, Inc.

2205 Executive Circle

Colorado Springs, CO 80906

888-965-6040

www.adinstruments.com

 

Braintree Scientific, Inc.

PO Box 361

Braintree, MA 02185

781-348-0768 

www.braintreesci.com

 

Drummond Scientific Company

500 Parkway, Box 700

Broomall, PA 19008

800-523-7480

www.drummondsci.com

 

Fine Science Tools

373-G Vintage Park Drive

Foster City, CA 94404

800-521-2109

www.finescience.com

 

George Tiemann &  Company

25 Plant Avenue

Hauppauge, NY 11788-3804

800-843-6266

www.georgetiemann.com

 

Harvard Apparatus

84 October Hill Road

Holliston, MA 01746

800-272-2775

www.harvardapparatus.com

 

Kent Scientific Corporation

1116 Litchfield Street

Torrington, CT 06790

888-572-8887

www.kentscientific.com

 

Roboz Surgical Instrument Co., Inc.

P.O. Box 10710

Gaithersburg, MD 20898-0710

800-424-2984

www.roboz.com

 

Stoelting Co.

620 Wheat Lane

Wood Dale, IL 60191

800-860-9775

www.stoeltingco.com

 

Vestavia Scientific

2400 Candlebrook Drive

Birmingham, AL 35226

205-979-9852

www.microperfusion.com

 

W. Nuhsbaum, Inc.  (Leica, Narishige)

760 Ridgeview Drive

McHenry, IL  60050

800-368-3368

www.nuhsbaum.com

 

World Precision Instruments

175 Sarasota Center Boulevard

Sarasota, FL 34240-9258

866-606-1974

www.wpiinc.com

 


Related Articles:

Renal Circulation
Clearance Techniques
Evaluation of Function in Single Segments of Isolated Renal Blood Vessels, Nephrons, and Collecting Ducts
Glomerular Filtration
Tubuloglomerular Feedback Control of Renal Vascular Resistance
Nephron Heterogeneity
Renal Micropuncture Techniques

Contact Editor

Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

Article Title: Micropuncture of the Kidney: A Primer on Techniques
 

How to Cite

John N. Lorenz. Micropuncture of the Kidney: A Primer on Techniques. Compr Physiol 2012, 2: 621-637. doi: 10.1002/cphy.c110035