4.7 Review

Progress of Microfluidic Continuous Separation Techniques for Micro-/Nanoscale Bioparticles

Journal

BIOSENSORS-BASEL
Volume 11, Issue 11, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/bios11110464

Keywords

microfluidics; separation; bioparticles; biosensors; biosample preparation

Funding

  1. Kumoh National Institute of Technology [2019104028]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Conventional membrane filtration techniques have limitations in the efficiency of separating biological particles, while microfluidic engineering allows for more efficient processing of rare biological samples in a continuous flow.
Separation of micro- and nano-sized biological particles, such as cells, proteins, and nucleotides, is at the heart of most biochemical sensing/analysis, including in vitro biosensing, diagnostics, drug development, proteomics, and genomics. However, most of the conventional particle separation techniques are based on membrane filtration techniques, whose efficiency is limited by membrane characteristics, such as pore size, porosity, surface charge density, or biocompatibility, which results in a reduction in the separation efficiency of bioparticles of various sizes and types. In addition, since other conventional separation methods, such as centrifugation, chromatography, and precipitation, are difficult to perform in a continuous manner, requiring multiple preparation steps with a relatively large minimum sample volume is necessary for stable bioprocessing. Recently, microfluidic engineering enables more efficient separation in a continuous flow with rapid processing of small volumes of rare biological samples, such as DNA, proteins, viruses, exosomes, and even cells. In this paper, we present a comprehensive review of the recent advances in microfluidic separation of micro-/nano-sized bioparticles by summarizing the physical principles behind the separation system and practical examples of biomedical applications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available