ArticleElectrophoresis2025
Characterizing Recent PDMS Changes in Electrokinetic-Based Microfluidic Devices' Performance and Manufacturing for Cell Sorting Applications.
Article in Electrophoresis, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Electrochemical Biosensors for Circulating Tumor Cells and ctDNA: Emerging Strategies for Precision Oncology.Annals of biomedical engineering · 2026Review
- Label-Free Sorting of Human Mesenchymal Stem Cells Using Insulating Dielectrophoresis.Electrophoresis · 2025Article
- Effects of natural aging on hydrophilicity and mechanical properties of PDMS in various storage environments.Npj Materials degradation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Understanding cells from complex biological samples is vital to understanding cellular biology and medical applications. One evolving tool for cell sorting is the use of microfluidic devices to achieve higher precision and remove the need for labeling cell subpopulations. However, few microfluidic devices have been translated commercially beyond academic research often due to challenges in larger scale fabrication. Here, we initially investigated a compelling label-free microfluidic device with complex geometries to perform contactless dielectrophoresis (cDEP) for applications in enriching cell subpopulations in oncology, neurology, stem cells, and sample preparation. We began scaling the manufacturing of cDEP devices using Dow Sylgard 184, more commonly referred to as PDMS (polydimethylsiloxane). However, we began observing a new, dynamic bubble formation phenomenon which had significant impacts on device performance. Within just 5 min of exposure at typical experimental values, cell death was nearly 100%. Variables related to manufacturing, environment, equipment, personnel, raw materials sourcing, lithography methods and experimental conditions/parameters were systematically evaluated to find the root cause of the exacerbated bubble formation observed. Further, alternate polymers were sourced for manufacturing and experimental performance comparisons. All variables investigated failed to solve the significant decline in device performance and increase in cell death. Upon completing chemical analysis in this work, we conclude that the decline in device performance was a direct result of changes to the expected PDMS properties and composition. Despite these challenges, our robust quality control combined with experimental protocols to remove bubbles from the cDEP devices achieved consistent experimental performance including 2-3 h run times and >90% cell viability after sorting. These new PDMS behaviors will need to continue to be monitored and controlled to ensure consistency in experimentation, application and commercialization feasibility for a wide variety of microfluidic device designs and applications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.