ReviewPharmaceutics2023
Microneedles in Advanced Microfluidic Systems: A Systematic Review throughout Lab and Organ-on-a-Chip Applications.
Review in Pharmaceutics, 2023. 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, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- 3D nanoprinting of embryo microinjection needles with anti-clogging features.Microsystems & nanoengineering · 2025Article
- Recent Developments in Microneedle Biosensors for Biomedical and Agricultural Applications.Micromachines · 2025Review
- Recent advances and perspectives of MicroNeedles for biomedical applications.Biophysical reviews · 2025Review
- Advancing healthcare through laboratory on a chip technology: Transforming microorganism identification and diagnostics.World journal of clinical cases · 2025Article
- Microneedle-Integrated Sensors for Extraction of Skin Interstitial Fluid and Metabolic Analysis.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- The Effect of 3D Printing Tilt Angle on the Penetration of 3D-Printed Microneedle Arrays.Micromachines · 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
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Microneedles (MNs) have been widely used in biomedical applications for drug delivery and biomarker detection purposes. Furthermore, MNs can also be used as a stand-alone tool to be combined with microfluidic devices. For that purpose, lab- or organ-on-a-chip are being developed. This systematic review aims to summarize the most recent progress in these emerging systems, to identify their advantages and limitations, and discuss promising potential applications of MNs in microfluidics. Therefore, three databases were used to search papers of interest, and their selection was made following the guidelines for systematic reviews proposed by PRISMA. In the selected studies, the MNs type, fabrication strategy, materials, and function/application were evaluated. The literature reviewed showed that although the use of MNs for lab-on-a-chip has been more explored than for organ-on-a-chip, some recent studies have explored this applicability with great potential for the monitoring of organ models. Overall, it is shown that the presence of MNs in advanced microfluidic devices can simplify drug delivery and microinjection, as well as fluid extraction for biomarker detection by using integrated biosensors, which is a promising tool to precisely monitor, in real-time, different kinds of biomarkers in lab- and organ-on-a-chip platforms.
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.