3D-printed microfluidic devices: fabrication, advantages and limitations—a mini review

Chen, Chengpeng; Mehl, Benjamin T.; Munshi, Akash S.; Townsend, Alexandra D.; Spence, Dana M.; Martin, R. Scott

doi:10.1039/c6ay01671e

Cited by 222 publications

(157 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

155

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Overall, this work investigated the solution blow spinning technique in a quantitative and systematic way to generate nanofibers, as well as the application of the fibers in 3D cell culture in a microfluidic device. Due to the robustness and customizability of 3D-printed fluid devices, 30 future work will focus on integrating this device with other modules such as separation and detection chips for (near) real time monitoring cell activity/communication.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Microchip-based 3D-cell culture using polymer nanofibers generated by solution blow spinning

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Polymer nano/micro fibers have found many applications including 3D cell culture and the creation of wound dressings. The fibers can be produced by a variety of techniques that include electrospinning, the primary disadvantage of which include the requirement for a high voltage supply (which may cause issues such as polymer denaturation) and lack of portability. More recently, solution blow spinning, where a high velocity sheath gas is used instead of high voltage, has been used to generate polymer fibers. In this work, we used blow spinning to create nano/microfibers for microchip-based 3D cell culture. First, we thoroughly investigated fiber generation from a 3D printed gas sheath device using two polymers that are amenable to cell culture (polycaprolactone, PCL and polystyrene, PS) as well as the parameters that can affect PCL and PS fiber quality. Using the 3D printed sheath device, it was found that the pressure of the sheath N2 and the concentration of polymer solutions determine if fibers can be produced as well as the resulting fiber morphology. In addition, we showed how these fibers can be used for 3D cell culture by directly depositing PCL fibers in petri dishes and well plates. It is shown the fibers have good compatibility with RAW 264.7 macrophages and the PCL fiber scaffold can be as thick as 178 ± 14 μm. PCL fibers created from solution blow spinning (with the 3D printed sheath device) were then integrated with a microfluidic device for the first time to fabricate a 3D cell culture scaffold with a flow component. After culturing and stimulating macrophages on the fluidic device, it was found that the integrated 3D fibrous scaffold is a better mimic of the extracellular matrix (as opposed to a flat, 2D substrate), with enhanced nitrite accumulation (product of nitric oxide release) from macrophages stimulated with lipopolysaccharide. PS fibers were also made and integrated in a microfluidic device for 3D culture of endothelial cells, which stayed viable for at least 72 hours (48 hours under the flowing conditions). This approach will be useful for future studies involving more realistic microchip-based culture models for studying cell-to-cell communication.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…3D-printing has emerged as a powerful tool for fabricating fluidic devices in recent years. 27-30 The device was printed with a Mojo 3D-printer (Stratasys, MN, USA) with Acrylonitrite Butadiene Styrene (ABS, Sigma-Aldrich, MO, USA) material. Figure 2A shows the assembling of the device.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Microchip-based 3D-cell culture using polymer nanofibers generated by solution blow spinning

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Perhaps one of the greatest potential advantages 3D printing could offer microfluidics is the possibility of making complex three-dimensional fluidic networks much more easily than using stacked, 2D surface micromachined layers. 3D printing can also allow for simplified interfacing of devices with external fluid sources, as threaded ports [5,6] and Luer-lock systems [2,7,8] have been printed as part of fluidic devices. Finally, 3D printing design files can be shared easily, which should facilitate collaboration and enable broad usage.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The topic of 3D printing of sub-millimeter-scale fluidics has had numerous reviews published in recent years [2,3,9–14], describing types of printers, and configurations and applications of devices. Here, we discuss improving resolution significantly to 3D print truly microfluidic (<100 μm cross-section) structures.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving from millifluidic to truly microfluidic sub-100-μm cross-section 3D printed devices

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three dimensional (3D) printing has generated considerable excitement in recent years regarding the extensive possibilities of this enabling technology. One area in which 3D printing has potential, not only for positive impact but also for substantial improvement, is microfluidics. To date many researchers have used 3D printers to make fluidic channels directed at point of care or lab on a chip applications. Here, we look critically at the cross-sectional sizes of these 3D printed fluidic structures, classifying them as millifluidic (>1 mm), sub-millifluidic (0.5–1.0 mm), large microfluidic (100–500 μm), or truly microfluidic (<100 μm). Additionally, we provide our prognosis for making 10–100 μm cross-section microfluidic features with custom formulated resins and stereolithographic printers. Such 3D printed microfluidic devices for bioanalysis will accelerate research through designs that can be easily created and modified, allowing improved assays to be developed.

show abstract

“…Additive manufacturing techniques have gained hype with the possibilities they represent at large scales, and therefore have been intensively developed to work at the microscale. However, most current applications are strongly restricted due to limitations in the resolution, surface roughness, and material selection 16,17 . Another 3D-microfabrication strategy, which is not based on additive manufacturing, is the use of femtosecond lasers irradiation followed by chemical etching 18–21 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

3D-glass molds for facile production of complex droplet microfluidic chips

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to leverage the immense potential of droplet microfluidics, it is necessary to simplify the process of chip design and fabrication. While polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) replica molding has greatly revolutionized the chip-production process, its dependence on 2D-limited photolithography has restricted the design possibilities, as well as further dissemination of microfluidics to non-specialized labs. To break free from these restrictions while keeping fabrication straighforward, we introduce an approach to produce complex multi-height (3D) droplet microfluidic glass molds and subsequent chip production by PDMS replica molding. The glass molds are fabricated with sub-micrometric resolution using femtosecond laser machining technology, which allows directly realizing designs with multiple levels or even continuously changing heights. The presented technique significantly expands the experimental capabilities of the droplet microfluidic chip. It allows direct fabrication of multilevel structures such as droplet traps for prolonged observation and optical fiber integration for fluorescence detection. Furthermore, the fabrication of novel structures based on sloped channels (ramps) enables improved droplet reinjection and picoinjection or even a multi-parallelized drop generator based on gradients of confinement. The fabrication of these and other 3D-features is currently only available at such resolution by the presented strategy. Together with the simplicity of PDMS replica molding, this provides an accessible solution for both specialized and non-specialized labs to customize microfluidic experimentation and expand their possibilities.

show abstract

3D-printed microfluidic devices: fabrication, advantages and limitations—a mini review

Cited by 222 publications

References 72 publications

Microchip-based 3D-cell culture using polymer nanofibers generated by solution blow spinning

Microchip-based 3D-cell culture using polymer nanofibers generated by solution blow spinning

Moving from millifluidic to truly microfluidic sub-100-μm cross-section 3D printed devices

3D-glass molds for facile production of complex droplet microfluidic chips

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About