ArticleBiomicrofluidics2020
An inexpensive microfluidic device for three-dimensional hydrodynamic focusing in imaging flow cytometry.
Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microfluidic Chip for High-Throughput Microstructure Detection of Precursor Particles.Micromachines · 2026Article
- Simplified 3D hydrodynamic flow focusing for lab-on-chip single particle study.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- A Novel Detachable, Reusable, and Versatile Acoustic Tweezer Manipulation Platform for Biochemical Analysis and Detection Systems.Biosensors · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We present design, characterization, and testing of an inexpensive, sheath-flow based microfluidic device for three-dimensional (3D) hydrodynamic focusing of cells in imaging flow cytometry. In contrast to other 3D sheathing devices, our device hydrodynamically focuses the cells in a single-file near the bottom wall of the microchannel that allows imaging cells with high magnification and low working distance objectives, without the need for small device dimensions. The relatively large dimensions of the microchannels enable easy fabrication using less-precise fabrication techniques, and the simplicity of the device design avoids the need for tedious alignment of various layers. We have characterized the performance of the device with 3D numerical simulations and validated these simulations with experiments of hydrodynamic focusing of a fluorescently dyed sample fluid. The simulations show that the width and the height of the 3D focused sample stream can be controlled independently by varying the heights of main and side channels of the device, and the flow rates of sample and sheath fluids. Based on simulations, we also provide useful guidelines for choosing the device dimensions and flow rates for focusing cells of a particular size. Thereafter, we demonstrate the applicability of our device for imaging a large number of RBCs using brightfield microscopy. We also discuss the choice of the region of interest and camera frame rate so as to image each cell individually in our device. The design of our microfluidic device makes it equally applicable for imaging cells of different sizes using various other imaging techniques such as phase-contrast and fluorescence microscopy.
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.