Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26339325›Full record

ArticleBiomicrofluidics2015

Three-dimensional printed millifluidic devices for zebrafish embryo tests.

Feng Zhu, Joanna Skommer, Niall P Macdonald, Timo Friedrich, Jan Kaslin, Donald Wlodkowic

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
7.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Antimicrobial Polymers for Additive Manufacturing.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 3D Printing of Organs-On-Chips.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 3D printed microfluidic mixer for point-of-care diagnosis of anemia.Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Annual International Conference · 2016
    Article
  16. A Role for 3D Printing in Kidney-on-a-Chip Platforms.Current transplantation reports · 2016
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Feng ZhuThe BioMEMS Research Group, School of Applied Sciences, RMIT University , Melbourne, Victoria 3083, Australia.
Joanna SkommerThe BioMEMS Research Group, School of Applied Sciences, RMIT University , Melbourne, Victoria 3083, Australia.
Niall P MacdonaldSchool of Engineering, University of Glasgow , Glasgow G12 8QQ, United Kingdom.
Timo FriedrichAustralian Regenerative Medicine Institute, Monash University , Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia.
Jan KaslinAustralian Regenerative Medicine Institute, Monash University , Clayton, Victoria 3800, Australia.
Donald Wlodkowic
RMIT University · AUAustralian Regenerative Medicine Institute · AUUniversity of Glasgow · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Implementations of Lab-on-a-Chip technologies for in-situ analysis of small model organisms and embryos (both invertebrate and vertebrate) are attracting an increasing interest. A significant hurdle to widespread applications of microfluidic and millifluidic devices for in-situ analysis of small model organisms is the access to expensive clean room facilities and complex microfabrication technologies. Furthermore, these resources require significant investments and engineering know-how. For example, poly(dimethylsiloxane) soft lithography is still largely unattainable to the gross majority of biomedical laboratories willing to pursue development of chip-based platforms. They often turn instead to readily available but inferior classical solutions. We refer to this phenomenon as workshop-to-bench gap of bioengineering science. To tackle the above issues, we examined the capabilities of commercially available Multi-Jet Modelling (MJM) and Stereolithography (SLA) systems for low volume fabrication of optical-grade millifluidic devices designed for culture and biotests performed on millimetre-sized specimens such as zebrafish embryos. The selected 3D printing technologies spanned a range from affordable personal desktop systems to high-end professional printers. The main motivation of our work was to pave the way for off-the-shelf and user-friendly 3D printing methods in order to rapidly and inexpensively build optical-grade millifluidic devices for customized studies on small model organisms. Compared with other rapid prototyping technologies such as soft lithography and infrared laser micromachining in poly(methyl methacrylate), we demonstrate that selected SLA technologies can achieve user-friendly and rapid production of prototypes, superior feature reproduction quality, and comparable levels of optical transparency. A caution need to be, however, exercised as majority of tested SLA and MJM resins were found toxic and caused significant developmental abnormalities in zebrafish embryos. Taken together, our data demonstrate that SLA technologies can be used for rapid and accurate production of devices for biomedical research. However, polymer biotoxicity needs to be carefully evaluated.

Identifiers

PMID26339325
PMCPMC4514717
OpenAlexW1582772849

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.