Skip to content
EvidenceHelixEvidenceLib · Scientific Encyclopedia
⌘ K

Scientific library

EvidenceLib encyclopediaAll articles A–Z2,835Open textbooks209Open-access articles1,406Cancer study catalog458How it is made

My workspace this browser

Saved pages0Notes & annotations0

Recently viewed

Explore by field

Cancer and Oncology182Genetics and Genomics170Neuroscience185Cardiovascular Medicine180Immunology142Pharmacology173Molecular Biology161Infectious Diseases150Rare and Inherited Diseases181Clinical Research173Anatomy and Physiology613Drugs and Chemicals621Psychiatry and Psychology185Public Health and Nutrition178Diagnostics and Medical Technology125Respiratory Medicine113Digestive System and Liver91Metabolism and Endocrine Disease177Bones, Joints, Muscles and Skin213Kidney, Urology and Women's Health173Eye, Ear, Nose and Throat55
Plans & pricingCompare EvidenceHelix workspace plans
Library›EvidenceLib›Diagnostics and Medical Technology›Dissection

Continue where you left off ()

Explore more with EvidenceHelix Workspace

Compare studies, analyze evidence and create research reports with premium tools.

Explore Researcher plans

Research reading room

Dissection

Diagnostics and Medical Technology · NLM MeSH · updated 2026-11-04 · version 1

Citations verified against PubMedNot yet clinician-reviewed10 referencesApproximately 5 min read

The separation and isolation of tissues for surgical purposes, or for the analysis or study of their structures.

Table of Contents

1. Definition2. Research landscape3. Reading the evidence4. Open-access studies5. Key reviews6. References7. About this article

Definition and research guide

This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.

Content available: 4 complete abstracts (887 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.

Definition

The separation and isolation of tissues for surgical purposes, or for the analysis or study of their structures.

Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.

Also known as: Dissections.

Where it fits in the MeSH classification

Broader topics
Specimen Handling; Surgical Procedures, Operative
Narrower topics
Microdissection

Research landscape

PubMed indexes 17,931 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Dissection” (counts retrieved 2026-11-04). 3,277 of them (18.3%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is 2010-2019 with 7,860 records.

Reviews account for 1,260 records (7.0%) and meta-analyses for 97. Randomized controlled trials number 306 (1.7%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.

PubMed records by publication periodthrough 1999: 2,256 records; 2000-2009: 4,538 records; 2010-2019: 7,860 records; 2020 onward: 3,277 records2,256through 19994,5382000-20097,8602010-20193,2772020 onward
Records in PubMed indexed with this heading, by publication period. Real counts from NCBI E-utilities; the final period covers only part of the current year. Volume reflects how much has been published, not how strong the evidence is.
Show the data
PeriodRecords
through 19992,256
2000-20094,538
2010-20197,860
2020 onward3,277
Share of records by publication typeReviews: 7.0 percent; Meta-analyses: 0.5 percent; Randomized controlled trials: 1.7 percentReviews7.0% (1,260)Meta-analyses0.5% (97)Randomized controlled trials1.7% (306)
Share of all PubMed records on this heading that carry each publication type. Types overlap with other records, so the shares do not sum to 100%.
Publication-type chart data
Publication types among 17,931 PubMed records
TypeRecordsShare
Reviews1,2607.0%
Meta-analyses970.5%
Randomized controlled trials3061.7%

Method: PubMed query "Dissection"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-11-04.

Reading the evidence in diagnostics and medical technology

A test or device is judged by how well it detects a condition, how often it gives false alarms or misses cases, and whether using it improves outcomes for people. Accuracy depends on who is tested and how common the condition is, so a test that performs well in a specialist hospital can perform differently in the community. Check the reference standard, the population studied, the sensitivity and specificity and whether results were confirmed in a separate group.

Evidence from open-access studies

These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.

Study comparison — selected abstracts, not a systematic review
Study / authorsYearSource label / designEurope PMC citationsLicence / source
Gene expression profiling of single cells from archival tissue with laser-capture microdissection and Smart-3SEQ
Foley JW, Zhu C, Jolivet P, Zhu SX, Lu P, Meaney MJ, et al.
2019Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
129cc by
PMID 31519740 · DOI · PMC6836736
An optimised protocol for isolation of RNA from small sections of laser-capture microdissected FFPE tissue amenable for next-generation sequencing
Amini P, Ettlin J, Opitz L, Clementi E, Malbon A, Markkanen E
2017Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
56cc by
PMID 28835206 · DOI · PMC5569520
Pulmonary sequestration in adults: a retrospective review of resected and unresected cases
Alsumrain M, Ryu JH
2018Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
48cc by
PMID 29871620 · DOI · PMC5989460
MR-SP2: A Microreactor-Based Workflow for Few-Cell Spatial Proteomics on the Legacy Zeiss PALM MicroBeam
Metzger M, Maldacker M, Hutzenlaub T, Paust N, Schilling O, Klatt JN
2026Research article
Design not recorded in structured metadata
0cc by
PMID 41914927 · DOI · PMC13140122

Gene expression profiling of single cells from archival tissue with laser-capture microdissection and Smart-3SEQ [1]

Research article Foley JW, Zhu C, Jolivet P, Zhu SX, Lu P, Meaney MJ, et al. · · 2019 · cited 129 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is a sensitive and accurate method for quantifying gene expression.
Closing excerpt
In particular, Smart-3SEQ's compatibility with FFPE tissue unlocks an enormous number of archived clinical samples; combined with LCM it allows unprecedented studies of small cell populations and single cells isolated by their in situ context.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (160 words)

RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) is a sensitive and accurate method for quantifying gene expression. Small samples or those whose RNA is degraded, such as formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue, remain challenging to study with nonspecialized RNA-seq protocols. Here, we present a new method, Smart-3SEQ, that accurately quantifies transcript abundance even with small amounts of total RNA and effectively characterizes small samples extracted by laser-capture microdissection (LCM) from FFPE tissue. We also obtain distinct biological profiles from FFPE single cells, which have been impossible to study with previous RNA-seq protocols, and we use these data to identify possible new macrophage phenotypes associated with the tumor microenvironment. We propose Smart-3SEQ as a highly cost-effective method to enable large gene expression profiling experiments unconstrained by sample size and tissue availability. In particular, Smart-3SEQ's compatibility with FFPE tissue unlocks an enormous number of archived clinical samples; combined with LCM it allows unprecedented studies of small cell populations and single cells isolated by their in situ context.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 31519740 · DOI · PMC6836736

An optimised protocol for isolation of RNA from small sections of laser-capture microdissected FFPE tissue amenable for next-generation sequencing [2]

Research article Amini P, Ettlin J, Opitz L, Clementi E, Malbon A, Markkanen E · · 2017 · cited 56 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundFormalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue constitutes a vast treasury of samples for biomedical research.
Closing excerpt
The possibility to study gene expression signatures in specific small sections of archival FFPE tissue, which often entail large amounts of highly relevant clinical follow-up data, unlocks a new dimension of hitherto difficult-to-analyse samples which now become amenable for investigation.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (284 words)

BackgroundFormalin-fixed paraffin embedded (FFPE) tissue constitutes a vast treasury of samples for biomedical research. Thus far however, extraction of RNA from FFPE tissue has proved challenging due to chemical RNA-protein crosslinking and RNA fragmentation, both of which heavily impact on RNA quantity and quality for downstream analysis. With very small sample sizes, e.g. when performing Laser-capture microdissection (LCM) to isolate specific subpopulations of cells, recovery of sufficient RNA for analysis with reverse-transcription quantitative PCR (RT-qPCR) or next-generation sequencing (NGS) becomes very cumbersome and difficult.MethodsWe excised matched cancer-associated stroma (CAS) and normal stroma from clinical specimen of FFPE canine mammary tumours using LCM, and compared the commonly used protease-based RNA isolation procedure with an adapted novel technique that additionally incorporates a focused ultrasonication step.ResultsWe successfully adapted a protocol that uses focused ultrasonication to isolate RNA from small amounts of deparaffinised, stained, clinical LCM samples. Using this approach, we found that total RNA yields could be increased by 8- to 12-fold compared to a commonly used protease-based extraction technique. Surprisingly, RNA extracted using this new approach was qualitatively at least equal if not superior compared to the old approach, as Cq values in RT-qPCR were on average 2.3-fold lower using the new method. Finally, we demonstrate that RNA extracted using the new method performs comparably in NGS as well.ConclusionsWe present a successful isolation protocol for extraction of RNA from difficult and limiting FFPE tissue samples that enables successful analysis of small sections of clinically relevant specimen. The possibility to study gene expression signatures in specific small sections of archival FFPE tissue, which often entail large amounts of highly relevant clinical follow-up data, unlocks a new dimension of hitherto difficult-to-analyse samples which now become amenable for investigation.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 28835206 · DOI · PMC5569520

Pulmonary sequestration in adults: a retrospective review of resected and unresected cases [3]

Research article Alsumrain M, Ryu JH · · 2018 · cited 48 times (Europe PMC)

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
BackgroundPulmonary sequestration (PS) is a form of congenital pulmonary malformation that is generally diagnosed in childhood or adolescence and usually resected when diagnosed.
Closing excerpt
The decision regarding surgical resection needs to weigh various factors including clinical manifestations related to PS, risk of surgical complications, comorbidities, and individual patient preferences.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (241 words)

BackgroundPulmonary sequestration (PS) is a form of congenital pulmonary malformation that is generally diagnosed in childhood or adolescence and usually resected when diagnosed. We aim to identify the clinical presentation and course of patients diagnosed to have PS during adulthood.MethodsUsing a computer-assisted search of Mayo clinic medical records, we identified adult patients with PS diagnosed between 1997 and 2016. Clinical and radiological data were collected including postoperative course for those who underwent surgical resection.ResultsWe identified 32 adult patients with PS; median age at diagnosis was 42 years (IQR 28-53); 17 patients (53%) were men. The median sequestration size was 6.6 cm (IQR 4.4-9.3). The type of sequestration was intralobar in 81% and extralobar in 19%. The most common location was left lower lobe posteromedially (56%). Forty-seven percent of the patients presented with no relevant symptoms. The most common radiographic finding was mass/consolidation in 61% and the most common feeding artery origin was the thoracic aorta (54%). Surgical resection was performed in 18 patients (56%) and postoperative complication was reported in 5 patients (28%). There was no surgical mortality. Median duration of follow-up after diagnosis for unresected cases, most of whom were asymptomatic, was 19 months (IQR 4-26) with no complications related to the PS reported.ConclusionsNearly one-half of adult patients with PS present with no relevant symptoms. The decision regarding surgical resection needs to weigh various factors including clinical manifestations related to PS, risk of surgical complications, comorbidities, and individual patient preferences.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 29871620 · DOI · PMC5989460

MR-SP2: A Microreactor-Based Workflow for Few-Cell Spatial Proteomics on the Legacy Zeiss PALM MicroBeam [4]

Research article Metzger M, Maldacker M, Hutzenlaub T, Paust N, Schilling O, Klatt JN · · 2026

Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
Opening excerpt
Laser capture microdissection (LCM) combined with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) enables spatial proteomics at the few-cell level but is constrained by cumulative losses during specimen capture, surface adsorption during processing, and sample transfer prior to LC-MS/MS analysis.
Closing excerpt
MR-SP2 improves identification depth for few-cell FFPE samples by nearly 3-fold compared to conventional tube-based workflows.
Interpretation limits
Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (202 words)

Laser capture microdissection (LCM) combined with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) enables spatial proteomics at the few-cell level but is constrained by cumulative losses during specimen capture, surface adsorption during processing, and sample transfer prior to LC-MS/MS analysis. The capture-associated losses are particularly relevant for pressure catapulting systems such as the legacy Zeiss PALM MicroBeam, which, despite discontinuation, remains in active use and therefore requires compatible low-loss workflows. We present MR-SP2 (microreactor-based sample preparation for spatial proteomics), a one-pot workflow integrating reproducible Zeiss LCM-cut specimen capture, processing with minimized adsorptive losses, and pipetting-free transfer with Evotip disposable precolumns. The workflow was evaluated using a formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) murine kidney tissue analyzed by timsTOF flex LC-MS/MS analysis. Across 50,000 μm3 regions (22 cells), MR-SP2 modestly improved proteome depth (3381 ± 80 versus 3174 ± 59 proteins). Decreasing sample input further accentuated the advantage of MR-SP2 in maintaining higher identification rates, highlighting the successful reduction of the adsorptive losses. At 12,500 μm3 (5-6 cells), identifications increased to 1145 ± 188 versus 302 ± 126. At 3125 μm3 (1-2 cells), identifications reached 695 ± 112 versus 206 ± 51. MR-SP2 improves identification depth for few-cell FFPE samples by nearly 3-fold compared to conventional tube-based workflows.

Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41914927 · DOI · PMC13140122

Key reviews and meta-analyses

The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.

  • Research article Best teaching practices in anatomy education: A critical review [5]
    Estai M, Bunt S · Ann Anat · 2016 · cited 472 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Guidelines for endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer [6]
    Ono H, Yao K, Fujishiro M, Oda I, Nimura S, Yahagi N, et al. · Dig Endosc · 2016 · cited 397 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Cadaveric dissection as an educational tool for anatomical sciences in the 21st century [7]
    Ghosh SK · Anat Sci Educ · 2017 · cited 310 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for tumors of the gastrointestinal tract [8]
    Cao Y, Liao C, Tan A, Gao Y, Mo Z, Gao F · Endoscopy · 2009 · cited 280 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics [9]
    Aziz MA, McKenzie JC, Wilson JS, Cowie RJ, Ayeni SA, Dunn BK · Anat Rec · 2002 · cited 261 times (Europe PMC)
  • Research article Efficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection [10]
    Fujiya M, Tanaka K, Dokoshi T, Tominaga M, Ueno N, Inaba Y, et al. · Gastrointest Endosc · 2015 · cited 258 times (Europe PMC)

References

  1. Foley JW, Zhu C, Jolivet P, Zhu SX, Lu P, Meaney MJ, et al.. Gene expression profiling of single cells from archival tissue with laser-capture microdissection and Smart-3SEQ. . 2019. PMID 31519740 · DOI · PMC6836736
  2. Amini P, Ettlin J, Opitz L, Clementi E, Malbon A, Markkanen E. An optimised protocol for isolation of RNA from small sections of laser-capture microdissected FFPE tissue amenable for next-generation sequencing. . 2017. PMID 28835206 · DOI · PMC5569520
  3. Alsumrain M, Ryu JH. Pulmonary sequestration in adults: a retrospective review of resected and unresected cases. . 2018. PMID 29871620 · DOI · PMC5989460
  4. Metzger M, Maldacker M, Hutzenlaub T, Paust N, Schilling O, Klatt JN. MR-SP2: A Microreactor-Based Workflow for Few-Cell Spatial Proteomics on the Legacy Zeiss PALM MicroBeam. . 2026. PMID 41914927 · DOI · PMC13140122
  5. Estai M, Bunt S. Best teaching practices in anatomy education: A critical review. Ann Anat. 2016. PMID 26996541 · DOI
  6. Ono H, Yao K, Fujishiro M, Oda I, Nimura S, Yahagi N, et al.. Guidelines for endoscopic submucosal dissection and endoscopic mucosal resection for early gastric cancer. Dig Endosc. 2016. PMID 26234303 · DOI
  7. Ghosh SK. Cadaveric dissection as an educational tool for anatomical sciences in the 21st century. Anat Sci Educ. 2017. PMID 27574911 · DOI
  8. Cao Y, Liao C, Tan A, Gao Y, Mo Z, Gao F. Meta-analysis of endoscopic submucosal dissection versus endoscopic mucosal resection for tumors of the gastrointestinal tract. Endoscopy. 2009. PMID 19693750 · DOI
  9. Aziz MA, McKenzie JC, Wilson JS, Cowie RJ, Ayeni SA, Dunn BK. The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anat Rec. 2002. PMID 11891622 · DOI
  10. Fujiya M, Tanaka K, Dokoshi T, Tominaga M, Ueno N, Inaba Y, et al.. Efficacy and adverse events of EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection for the treatment of colon neoplasms: a meta-analysis of studies comparing EMR and endoscopic submucosal dissection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015. PMID 25592748 · DOI

About this article

Sources
NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
Verification
Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-11-04; title, year and DOI matched.
Review state
automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
Version
1, last updated 2026-11-04.

See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.

Evidence strength

EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.

Included with the Researcher plan

Reading every article stays free. This computed view is part of the paid plans.

See plans Sign in

Your notes

Notes and highlights stay in this browser only; they are not sent to EvidenceHelix.

Related research topics

  • Laser Capture MicrodissectionDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Liquid BiopsyDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • ParacentesisDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • PhlebotomyDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • ThoracentesisDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • AutoradiographyDiagnostics and Medical Technology

All 110 articles in Diagnostics and Medical Technology →

At a glance

17,931
PubMed records on this heading
18%
published since 2020
1,260
review articles
306
randomized trials
10
verified references below

Counts come from PubMed on 2026-11-04; they show how much has been written, not how strong the evidence is.

Related topics See all →

  • Laser Capture MicrodissectionDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • Liquid BiopsyDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • ParacentesisDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • PhlebotomyDiagnostics and Medical Technology
  • ThoracentesisDiagnostics and Medical Technology

My notes & annotations (0)

Nothing yet. Select text and press Highlight, or write a note in the Notes tab. Stored in this browser only.

Sources

  • NLM MeSH record ↗
  • PubMed search used ↗

EvidenceLib is a research-education resource, not medical advice. It does not diagnose, prescribe or recommend starting, stopping or changing any treatment. Talk to a qualified clinician about your own situation. Methods, sources and licences · Rights and removal requests · Legal · Support