2005
DOI: 10.1038/nbt1050
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Microfluidic sorting of mammalian cells by optical force switching

Abstract: Microfluidic-based devices have allowed miniaturization and increased parallelism of many common functions in biological assays; however, development of a practical technology for microfluidic-based fluorescence-activated cell sorting has proved challenging. Although a variety of different physical on-chip switch mechanisms have been proposed, none has satisfied simultaneously the requirements of high throughput, purity, and recovery of live, unstressed mammalian cells. Here we show that optical forces can be … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
444
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
5

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 637 publications
(449 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
0
444
0
Order By: Relevance
“…7 These cell sorting systems have been miniaturized to microfluidic devices, demonstrating the possibility of being integrated into lab-on-a-chip devices. 8,9 In contrast, label-free methods typically utilize differences in physical properties such as cell size, 10 density, 11 cell adhesion, [12][13][14][15] and dielectric properties. [16][17][18] One potential drawback in label-free methods is that the physical difference is not high enough for efficient separation in many cases, which limits the widespread use of the label-free methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…7 These cell sorting systems have been miniaturized to microfluidic devices, demonstrating the possibility of being integrated into lab-on-a-chip devices. 8,9 In contrast, label-free methods typically utilize differences in physical properties such as cell size, 10 density, 11 cell adhesion, [12][13][14][15] and dielectric properties. [16][17][18] One potential drawback in label-free methods is that the physical difference is not high enough for efficient separation in many cases, which limits the widespread use of the label-free methods.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[4][5][6] Microfluidic systems have been proven to be promising tools for particle/cell manipulation with higher sensitivity and accuracy than their macroscale counterparts. The last decade has seen extensive development of microfluidic approaches for particle/cell manipulation that resort to immunocapture, 7 externally applied physical fields, [8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18] microfiltration, 19,20 gravitational sedimentation, 21 or deterministic lateral migration. 22,23 More recently, cross-streamline migration induced by the hydrodynamic effects of carrier media, such as inertia 24,25 and viscoelasticity, 26,27 has shown its promise for effective particle/cell manipulation without need of labeling and external force fields.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30] and the references therein. We explore numerically two ways in which this might be possible.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%