Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38004974›Full record

ReviewMicromachines2023

Microfluidic Blood Separation: Key Technologies and Critical Figures of Merit.

Karina Torres-Castro, Katherine Acuña-Umaña, Leonardo Lesser-Rojas, Darwin R Reyes

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Micromachines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Karina Torres-CastroBiophysical and Biomedical Measurements Group, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-9959-6040
Katherine Acuña-UmañaMedical Devices Master's Program, Instituto Tecnológico de Costa Rica (ITCR), Cartago 30101, Costa Rica.ORCID 0000-0002-9571-9266
Leonardo Lesser-RojasResearch Center in Atomic, Nuclear and Molecular Sciences (CICANUM), San José 11501, Costa Rica.ORCID 0000-0003-4057-9486
Darwin R ReyesBiophysical and Biomedical Measurements Group, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), 100 Bureau Drive, Gaithersburg, MD 20899, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2986-0966

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Blood is a complex sample comprised mostly of plasma, red blood cells (RBCs), and other cells whose concentrations correlate to physiological or pathological health conditions. There are also many blood-circulating biomarkers, such as circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and various pathogens, that can be used as measurands to diagnose certain diseases. Microfluidic devices are attractive analytical tools for separating blood components in point-of-care (POC) applications. These platforms have the potential advantage of, among other features, being compact and portable. These features can eventually be exploited in clinics and rapid tests performed in households and low-income scenarios. Microfluidic systems have the added benefit of only needing small volumes of blood drawn from patients (from nanoliters to milliliters) while integrating (within the devices) the steps required before detecting analytes. Hence, these systems will reduce the associated costs of purifying blood components of interest (e.g., specific groups of cells or blood biomarkers) for studying and quantifying collected blood fractions. The microfluidic blood separation field has grown since the 2000s, and important advances have been reported in the last few years. Nonetheless, real POC microfluidic blood separation platforms are still elusive. A widespread consensus on what key figures of merit should be reported to assess the quality and yield of these platforms has not been achieved. Knowing what parameters should be reported for microfluidic blood separations will help achieve that consensus and establish a clear road map to promote further commercialization of these devices and attain real POC applications. This review provides an overview of the separation techniques currently used to separate blood components for higher throughput separations (number of cells or particles per minute). We present a summary of the critical parameters that should be considered when designing such devices and the figures of merit that should be explicitly reported when presenting a device's separation capabilities. Ultimately, reporting the relevant figures of merit will benefit this growing community and help pave the road toward commercialization of these microfluidic systems.

Indexed as

blood contentsblood sortingfigures of meritlab-on-a-chipmicrofluidic separationspathogenic bacteriared blood cellsseparation of blood

Identifiers

PMID38004974
PMCPMC10672873

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.