ArticleScientific reports2022
A high-throughput microfluidic device based on controlled incremental filtration to enable centrifugation-free, low extracorporeal volume leukapheresis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Raman spectroscopy combined with multiple technologies for label-free identification of immune cells: An overview.Journal of pharmaceutical analysis · 2026Review
- Advancements and Future Perspectives of Microfluidic Technology in Pediatric Healthcare.Smart medicine · 2025Review
- Microfluidic technologies for enhancing the potency, predictability and affordability of adoptive cell therapies.Nature biomedical engineering · 2025Review
- Ultra-low extracorporeal volume microfluidic leukapheresis is safe and effective in a rat model.Nature communications · 2025Article
- A Review of Research Progress in Microfluidic Bioseparation and Bioassay.Micromachines · 2024Review
- Separation of platelets by size in a microfluidic device based on controlled incremental filtration.Lab on a chip · 2024Article
- Rapid, label-free enrichment of lymphocytes in a closed system using a flow-through microfluidic device.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2024Article
- Recent advances in microfluidic cell separation to enable centrifugation-free, low extracorporeal volume leukapheresis in pediatric patients.Blood transfusion = Trasfusione del sangue · 2023Review
- Blood component separation in straight microfluidic channels.Biomicrofluidics · 2023Article
- Red blood cell rosetting enables size-based separation of specific lymphocyte subsets from blood in a microfluidic device.Lab on a chip · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Leukapheresis, the extracorporeal separation of white blood cells (WBCs) from red blood cells (RBCs) and platelets (PLTs), is a life-saving procedure used for treating patients with cancer and other conditions, and as the initial step in the manufacturing of cellular and gene-based therapies. Well-tolerated by adults, leukapheresis poses a significant risk to neonates and low-weight infants because the extracorporeal volume (ECV) of standard centrifugation-based machines represents a particularly large fraction of these patients' total blood volume. Here we describe a novel high-throughput microfluidic device (with a void volume of 0.4 mL) based on controlled incremental filtration (CIF) technology that could replace centrifugation for performing leukapheresis. The CIF device was tested extensively using whole blood from healthy volunteers at multiple hematocrits (5-30%) and flow rates (10-30 mL/min). In the flow-through regime, the CIF device separated WBCs with > 85% efficiency and 10-15% loss of RBCs and PLTs while processing whole blood diluted with saline to 10% hematocrit at a flow rate of 10 mL/min. In the recirculation regime, the CIF device demonstrated a similar level of separation performance, virtually depleting WBCs in the recirculating blood (~ 98% reduction) by the end of a 3.5-hour simulated leukapheresis procedure. Importantly, the device operated without clogging or decline in separation performance, with minimal activation of WBCs and PLTs and no measurable damage to RBCs. Compared to the typical parameters of centrifugation-based leukapheresis, the CIF device had a void volume at least 100-fold smaller, removed WBCs about twice as fast, and lost ~ 2-3-fold fewer PLTs, while operating at a flow rate compatible with the current practice. The hematocrit and flow rate at which the CIF device operated were significantly higher than previously published for other microfluidic cell separation methods. Finally, this study is the first to demonstrate a highly efficient separation of cells from recirculating blood using a microfluidic device. Overall, these findings suggest the feasibility of using high-throughput microfluidic cell separation technology to ultimately enable centrifugation-free, low-ECV leukapheresis. Such a capability would be particularly useful in young children, a vulnerable group of patients who are currently underserved.
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.