ArticleScientific reports2018
Acoustic impedance matched buffers enable separation of bacteria from blood cells at high cell concentrations.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 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
36 citing papers in PubMed, 102 citations in OpenAlex.
- Recent Advances in Bacterial Separation and Enrichment from Blood for the Diagnosis of Bloodstream Infections.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Advancing Plant Microbiome Research Through Host DNA Depletion Techniques.Plant biotechnology journal · 2026Review
- Thermoacoustic streaming in a linear temperature gradient.Physical review. E · 2025Article
- Simple dual filter workflow for facilitating blood culture-free and sensitive detection of pathogenic bacteria from blood.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Dielectrophoretic Microfluidic Designs for Precision Cell Enrichments and Highly Viable Label-Free Bacteria Recovery from Blood.Micromachines · 2025Article
- Acoustic pipette and biofunctional elastomeric microparticle system for rapid picomolar-level biomolecule detection in whole blood.Science advances · 2024Article
- A Review of Research Progress in Microfluidic Bioseparation and Bioassay.Micromachines · 2024Review
- EchoGrid: High-Throughput Acoustic Trapping for Enrichment of Environmental Microplastics.Analytical chemistry · 2024Article
- Remotely controlled drug release in deep brain regions of non-human primates.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2024Article
- Label-free separation of peripheral blood mononuclear cells from whole blood by gradient acoustic focusing.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Integrated Microfluidics for Single-Cell Separation and On-Chip Analysis: Novel Applications and Recent Advances.Small science · 2024Article
- Acoustofluidic Actuation of Living Cells.Micromachines · 2024Review
- OxyHbMeter-a novel bedside medical device for monitoring cell-free hemoglobin in the cerebrospinal fluid-proof of principle.Frontiers in medical technology · 2024Article
- Acoustofluidic Interfaces for the Mechanobiological Secretome of MSCs.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Pneumatic nano-sieve for CRISPR-based detection of drug-resistant bacteria.Nanoscale horizons · 2023Article
- Pneumatic Nano-Sieve for CRISPR-based Detection of Drug-resistant Bacteria.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023Article
- Migration Study of Dielectrophoretically Manipulated Red Blood Cells in Tapered Aluminium Microelectrode Array: A Pilot Study.Micromachines · 2023Article
- Acoustophoretic Characterization and Separation of Blood Cells in Acoustic Impedance Gradients.Physical review applied · 2023Article
- Fabrication of spectroscopic microfluidic chips for mastitis detection in raw milk.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Biomedical Applications of Microfluidic Devices: A Review.Biosensors · 2022Review
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
Sepsis is a common and often deadly systemic response to an infection, usually caused by bacteria. The gold standard for finding the causing pathogen in a blood sample is blood culture, which may take hours to days. Shortening the time to diagnosis would significantly reduce mortality. To replace the time-consuming blood culture we are developing a method to directly separate bacteria from red and white blood cells to enable faster bacteria identification. The blood cells are moved from the sample flow into a parallel stream using acoustophoresis. Due to their smaller size, the bacteria are not affected by the acoustic field and therefore remain in the blood plasma flow and can be directed to a separate outlet. When optimizing for sample throughput, 1 ml of undiluted whole blood equivalent can be processed within 12.5 min, while maintaining the bacteria recovery at 90% and the blood cell removal above 99%. That makes this the fastest label-free microfluidic continuous flow method per channel to separate bacteria from blood with high bacteria recovery (>80%). The high throughput was achieved by matching the acoustic impedance of the parallel stream to that of the blood sample, to avoid that acoustic forces relocate the fluid streams.
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.