ArticleBiosensors2026
Microfluidic Chamber Design for Organ-on-a-Chip: A Computational Fluid Dynamics Study of Pillar Geometry and Pulsatile Perfusion.
Article in Biosensors, 2026. 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.
- Immune Cell Responses to Fluid Shear: Overview and Design Considerations forCurrent opinion in biomedical engineering · 2026Article
- Vascularized bone organoids: current advances and a biomimetic platform for osteonecrosis of the femoral head.Bone research · 2026Review
- Review
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.
Funding
Abstract
Organ-on-a-Chip (OOC) platforms are microfluidic systems that recreate key features of human organ physiology in vitro via controlled perfusion. Fluid mechanical stimuli strongly influence cell morphology and function, making this important for cardiovascular OOC applications exposed to pulsatile blood flow. However, many existing OOC devices employ relatively simple chamber geometries and steady inflow assumptions, which may cause non-uniform shear exposure to cells, create stagnant regions with prolonged residence time, and overlook the specific effects of pulsatile perfusion. Here, we used computational fluid dynamics (CFD) to investigate how chamber geometry and inflow conditions shape the near-wall flow environment on a cell culture surface at a matched cycle-averaged volumetric flow rate. Numerical results demonstrated that pillarized chambers markedly reduced relative residence time (RRT) versus the flat chamber, and the small pillar configuration produced the most uniform time-averaged wall shear stress (TAWSS) distribution among the tested designs. Phase-resolved analysis further showed that wall shear stress varies with waveform phase, indicating that steady inflow may not capture features of pulsatile perfusion. These findings provide practical guidance for pillar geometries and perfusion conditions to create more controlled and physiologically relevant microenvironments in OOC platforms, thus improving the reliability of cell experimental readouts.
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.