ArticlePloS one2018
Dynamic inking of large-scale stamps for multiplexed microcontact printing and fabrication of cell microarrays.
Article in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- A pattern and lock strategy integrating acoustic patterning and hydrogel crosslinking for stable cell architectures.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Soft lithography-based biomolecule patterning techniques and their applications in subcellular protein interaction analysis.Materials today. Bio · 2025Review
- Recent Advances in Polymer Science and Fabrication Processes for Enhanced Microfluidic Applications: An Overview.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Gap-directed chemical lift-off lithographic nanoarchitectonics for arbitrary sub-micrometer patterning.Beilstein journal of nanotechnology · 2023Article
- Engineered Tools to Study Intercellular Communication.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2021Review
- Exploiting CRISPR Cas9 in Three-Dimensional Stem Cell Cultures to Model Disease.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microcontact printing has become a versatile soft lithography technique used to produce molecular micro- and nano-patterns consisting of a large range of different biomolecules. Despite intensive research over the last decade and numerous applications in the fields of biosensors, microarrays and biomedical applications, the large-scale implementation of microcontact printing is still an issue. It is hindered by the stamp-inking step that is critical to ensure a reproducible and uniform transfer of inked molecules over large areas. This is particularly important when addressing application such as cell microarray manufacturing, which are currently used for a wide range of analytical and pharmaceutical applications. In this paper, we present a large-scale and multiplexed microcontact printing process of extracellular matrix proteins for the fabrication of cell microarrays. We have developed a microfluidic inking approach combined with a magnetic clamping technology that can be adapted to most standard substrates used in biology. We have demonstrated a significant improvement of homogeneity of printed protein patterns on surfaces larger than 1 cm2 through the control of both the flow rate and the wetting mechanism of the stamp surface during microfluidic inking. Thanks to the reproducibility and integration capabilities provided by microfluidics, we have achieved the printing of three different adhesion proteins in one-step transfer. Selective cell adhesion and cell shape adaptation on the produced patterns were observed, showing the suitability of this approach for producing on-demand large-scale cell microarrays.
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.