ArticleMicromachines2022
Assessment of Blood Biophysical Properties Using Pressure Sensing with Micropump and Microfluidic Comparator.
Article in Micromachines, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- An ex vivo model of interactions between extracellular vesicles and peripheral mononuclear blood cells in whole blood.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2023Article
- Quantification of Blood Viscoelasticity under Microcapillary Blood Flow.Micromachines · 2023Article
- Biomechanical Assessment of Red Blood Cells in Pulsatile Blood Flows.Micromachines · 2023Article
- Biosensing of Haemorheological Properties Using Microblood Flow Manipulation and Quantification.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Red Blood Cell Sedimentation Index Using Shear Stress of Blood Flow in Microfluidic Channel.Biosensors · 2022Article
- Contributions of Red Blood Cell Sedimentation in a Driving Syringe to Blood Flow in Capillary Channels.Micromachines · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
To identify the biophysical properties of blood samples consistently, macroscopic pumps have been used to maintain constant flow rates in a microfluidic comparator. In this study, the bulk-sized and expensive pump is replaced with a cheap and portable micropump. A specific reference fluid (i.e., glycerin solution [40%]) with a small volume of red blood cell (RBC) (i.e., 1% volume fraction) as fluid tracers is supplied into the microfluidic comparator. An averaged velocity (<Ur>) obtained with micro-particle image velocimetry is converted into the flow rate of reference fluid (Qr) (i.e., Qr = CQ × Ac × <Ur>, Ac: cross-sectional area, CQ = 1.156). Two control variables of the micropump (i.e., frequency: 400 Hz and volt: 150 au) are selected to guarantee a consistent flow rate (i.e., COV < 1%). Simultaneously, the blood sample is supplied into the microfluidic channel under specific flow patterns (i.e., constant, sinusoidal, and periodic on-off fashion). By monitoring the interface in the comparator as well as Qr, three biophysical properties (i.e., viscosity, junction pressure, and pressure-induced work) are obtained using analytical expressions derived with a discrete fluidic circuit model. According to the quantitative comparison results between the present method (i.e., micropump) and the previous method (i.e., syringe pump), the micropump provides consistent results when compared with the syringe pump. Thereafter, representative biophysical properties, including the RBC aggregation, are consistently obtained for specific blood samples prepared with dextran solutions ranging from 0 to 40 mg/mL. In conclusion, the present method could be considered as an effective method for quantifying the physical properties of blood samples, where the reference fluid is supplied with a cheap and portable micropump.
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.