ArticleAnalytical and bioanalytical chemistry2010
Contact printing of arrayed microstructures.
Article in Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advances in Single-Cell Printing.Micromachines · 2022Review
- Multiplexed in-gel microfluidic immunoassays: characterizing protein target loss during reprobing of benzophenone-modified hydrogels.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Characterization of Tensioned PDMS Membranes for Imaging Cytometry on Microraft Arrays.Analytical chemistry · 2018Article
- Polystyrene-coated micropallets for culture and separation of primary muscle cells.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2012Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A novel contact printing method utilizing a sacrificial layer of polyacrylic acid (PAA) was developed to selectively modify the upper surfaces of arrayed microstructures. The method was characterized by printing polystyrene onto SU-8 microstructures to create an improved substrate for a cell-based microarray platform. Experiments measuring cell growth on SU-8 arrays modified with polystyrene and fibronectin demonstrated improved growth of NIH 3T3 (93% vs. 38%), HeLa (97% vs. 77%), and HT1080 (76% vs. 20%) cells relative to that for the previously used coating method. In addition, use of the PAA sacrificial layer permitted the printing of functionalized polystyrene, carboxylate polystyrene nanospheres, and silica nanospheres onto the arrays in a facile manner. Finally, a high concentration of extracellular matrix materials (ECM), such as collagen (5 mg/mL) and gelatin (0.1%), was contact-printed onto the array structures using as little as 5 microL of the ECM reagent and without the formation of a continuous film bridge across the microstructures. Murine embryonic stem cells cultured on arrays printed with this gelatin hydrogel remained in an undifferentiated state indicating an adequate surface gelatin layer to maintain these cells over time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.