Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28372723›Full record

ReviewAnalytica chimica acta2017

Review: Microbial analysis in dielectrophoretic microfluidic systems.

Renny E Fernandez, Ali Rohani, Vahid Farmehini, Nathan S Swami

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Analytica chimica acta, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 50 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
50citing papers in PubMed
9.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

50 citing papers in PubMed, 136 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Dielectrophoretic capture ofFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Optical Sensors for Bacterial Detection.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Controlled Transport of Individual Microparticles Using Dielectrophoresis.Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids · 2023
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Renny E FernandezDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA.
Ali RohaniDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA.
Vahid FarmehiniDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA.
Nathan S SwamiDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904, USA. Electronic address: nswami@virginia.edu.
University of Virginia · US

Funding

Optimizing Inter-Microbial Antagonisms to Control Clostridium Difficile InfectionR21AI130902 · NIAID · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI SWAMI, NATHAN, WARREN, CIRLE ALCANTARA · 2017 to 2018
$413k
NIAID NIH HHS R21 AI130902
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infections caused by various known and emerging pathogenic microorganisms, including antibiotic-resistant strains, are a major threat to global health and well-being. This highlights the urgent need for detection systems for microbial identification, quantification and characterization towards assessing infections, prescribing therapies and understanding the dynamic cellular modifications. Current state-of-the-art microbial detection systems exhibit a trade-off between sensitivity and assay time, which could be alleviated by selective and label-free microbial capture onto the sensor surface from dilute samples. AC electrokinetic methods, such as dielectrophoresis, enable frequency-selective capture of viable microbial cells and spores due to polarization based on their distinguishing size, shape and sub-cellular compositional characteristics, for downstream coupling to various detection modalities. Following elucidation of the polarization mechanisms that distinguish bacterial cells from each other, as well as from mammalian cells, this review compares the microfluidic platforms for dielectrophoretic manipulation of microbials and their coupling to various detection modalities, including immuno-capture, impedance measurement, Raman spectroscopy and nucleic acid amplification methods, as well as for phenotypic assessment of microbial viability and antibiotic susceptibility. Based on the urgent need within point-of-care diagnostics towards reducing assay times and enhancing capture of the target organism, as well as the emerging interest in isolating intact microbials based on their phenotype and subcellular features, we envision widespread adoption of these label-free and selective electrokinetic techniques.

Indexed as

Microfluidic Analytical TechniquesAnimalsAnti-Bacterial AgentsBacteriaElectric ImpedanceNucleic Acid Amplification TechniquesSpectrum Analysis, RamanAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibioticsBacteriaDielectrophoresisMicrofluidicsPhenotypeSensor

Identifiers

PMID28372723
PMCPMC5424535
OpenAlexW2591576238

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.