ReviewRapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM2026
From Precision Machining to Hybrid Microfabrication: A Review on Quadrupole and Ion Trap Mass Analyzer Manufacturing.
Review in Rapid communications in mass spectrometry : RCM, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
rationaleAs quadrupole and ion trap mass analyzers are miniaturized toward millimeter scales, fabrication quality increasingly constrains analytical performance. Micrometer-scale deviations in electrode geometry, surface finish, and assembly alignment can introduce higher order multipole fields, thereby degrading resolution, sensitivity, and ion transmission. Conventional precision machining and sequential assembly therefore face increasing difficulty in simultaneously achieving field fidelity, geometric complexity, and scalable integration.
methodsThis narrative review compares conventional subtractive manufacturing with four advanced routes: microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), low-temperature co-fired ceramics (LTCC), additive manufacturing (AM), and printed-circuit-board (PCB)-based architectures. A process-problem-performance framework is used to link each process to the error modes it mitigates or introduces and to the analytical performance affected.
resultsMEMS provides high planar registration but remains limited in forming true 3D electrode surfaces. LTCC reduces assembly burden and supports multilayer integration but is constrained by shrinkage and feature resolution. AM offers monolithic 3D freedom, although electrode-grade performance requires surface engineering, metallization, and control of dielectric and vacuum-related effects. PCB-based architectures enable rapid prototyping and field synthesis but usually lack field-critical geometric precision. Across these routes, no single technology simultaneously maximizes fabrication precision, geometric freedom, and scalable integration.
conclusionsHybrid manufacturing strategies that allocate field-critical, structural, interconnect, packaging, and calibration functions to complementary processes represent the most practical route toward reproducible next-generation quadrupole and ion trap mass analyzers. Future progress will depend on standardized comparisons of fabrication tolerance, surface quality, RF compatibility, material stability, and demonstrated analytical performance.
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.