ArticlePloS one2017
In situ single cell detection via microfluidic magnetic bead assay.
Article in PloS one, 2017. 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, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- A robot-assisted acoustofluidic end effector.Nature communications · 2022Article
- A practical microfluidic pump enabled by acoustofluidics and 3D printing.Microfluidics and nanofluidics · 2021Article
- Magnetic Particles: Their Applications from Sample Preparations to Biosensing Platforms.Micromachines · 2020Review
- Lab-on-a-chip electrical multiplexing techniques for cellular and molecular biomarker detection.Biomicrofluidics · 2018Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present a single cell detection device based on magnetic bead assay and micro Coulter counters. This device consists of two successive micro Coulter counters, coupled with a high gradient magnetic field generated by an external magnet. The device can identify single cells in terms of the transit time difference of the cell through the two micro Coulter counters. Target cells are conjugated with magnetic beads via specific antibody and antigen binding. A target cell traveling through the two Coulter counters interacts with the magnetic field, and have a longer transit time at the 1st counter than that at the 2nd counter. In comparison, a non-target cell has no interaction with the magnetic field, and hence has nearly the same transit times through the two counters. Each cell passing through the two counters generates two consecutive voltage pulses one after the other; the pulse widths and magnitudes indicating the cell's transit times through the counters and the cell's size respectively. Thus, by measuring the pulse widths (transit times) of each cell through the two counters, each single target cell can be differentiated from non-target cells even if they have similar sizes. We experimentally proved that the target human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVECs) and non-target rat adipose-derived stem cells (rASCs) have significant different transit time distribution, from which we can determine the recognition regions for both cell groups quantitatively. We further demonstrated that within a mixed cell population of rASCs and HUVECs, HUVECs can be detected in situ and the measured HUVECs ratios agree well with the pre-set ratios. With the simple device structure and easy sample preparation, this method is expected to enable single cell detection in a continuous flow and can be applied to facilitate general cell detection applications such as stem cell identification and enumeration.
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.