4.4 Article

Out-of-plane microvalves for whole blood separation on lab-on-a-CD

期刊

出版社

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/0960-1317/20/10/105024

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
  3. Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI)
  4. Shared Hierarchical Academic Research Computing Network (SHARCNET)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The emergence of lab-on-a-CD technology provides a centrifugal and compact platform for high throughput blood analysis in point-of-care (POC) diagnostics. Blood separation of the whole blood is the first step for clinical blood diagnosis. This paper describes a novel design of an out-of-plane microvalve that enables high performance of whole blood separation on lab-on-a-CD centrifugal devices. In our lab-on-a-CD design, blood cells and plasma are redistributed into a downstream sedimentation reservoir and an upstream supernatant reservoir, respectively, when the device spins. By tuning the rotational speed, the 'close' or 'open' status of an out-of-plane microvalve embedded in the lab-on-a-CD device is controlled to isolate these two reservoirs. Compared with a similar design but without the out-of-plane microvalve, this novel microvalve structure can effectively prevent blood cells from diffusing back to the supernatant reservoir containing pure plasma, and thus improve the performance of blood separation as well as subsequent blood analysis. We demonstrate that the lab-on-a-CD device with out-of-plane microvalves can achieve 99.9% plasma purity and 96 +/- 0.5% plasma yield for the whole blood. Because of its simple structure and easily controlled working mechanism, the out-of-plane microvalve not only leads to high performance of whole blood separation, but also makes the manufacturing of this type of lab-on-a-CD device easy and inexpensive. If integrated into some existing lab-on-a-CD devices, the out-of-plane microvalve may also help improve their performance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据