ArticleBiomicrofluidics2012
Polyester μ-assay chip for stem cell studies.
Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2012. 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.
- iPSC-derived and Patient-Derived Organoids: Applications and challenges in scalability and reproducibility as pre-clinical models.Current research in toxicology · 2024Article
- Microfluidic Biofabrication of 3D Multicellular Spheroids by Modulation of Non-geometrical Parameters.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Article
- A Current View of Functional Biomaterials for Wound Care, Molecular and Cellular Therapies.BioMed research international · 2015Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The application of microfluidic technologies to stem cell research is of great interest to biologists and bioengineers. This is chiefly due to the intricate ability to control the cellular environment, the reduction of reagent volume, experimentation time and cost, and the high-throughput screening capabilities of microscale devices. Despite this importance, a simple-to-use microfluidic platform for studying the effects of growth factors on stem cell differentiation has not yet emerged. With this consideration, we have designed and characterized a microfluidic device that is easy to fabricate and operate, yet contains several functional elements. Our device is a simple polyester-based microfluidic chip capable of simultaneously screening multiple independent stem cell culture conditions. Generated by laser ablation and stacking of multiple layers of polyester film, this device integrates a 10 × 10 microwell array for cell culture with a continuous perfusion system and a non-linear concentration gradient generator. We performed numerical calculations to predict the gradient formation and calculate the shear stress acting on the cells inside the device. The device operation was validated by culturing murine embryonic stem cells inside the microwells for 5 days. Furthermore, we showed the ability to maintain the pluripotency of stem cell aggregates in response to concentrations of leukemia inhibitory factor ranging from 0 to ∼1000 U/ml. Given its simplicity, fast manufacturing method, scalability, and the cell-compatible nature of the device, it may be a useful platform for long-term stem cell culture and studies.
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.