4.7 Article

Continuous-flow cytomorphological staining and analysis

期刊

LAB ON A CHIP
卷 14, 期 3, 页码 522-531

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c3lc50870f

关键词

-

资金

  1. David and Lucile Packard Fellowship for Scientists and Engineers
  2. Coulter Foundation Translational Research Award
  3. National Science Foundation CAREER Award [1150588]
  4. Goldwater Scholarship
  5. Howard Hughes Medical Institute to UCLA through the Precollege and Undergraduate Science Education Program
  6. Div Of Chem, Bioeng, Env, & Transp Sys [1150588] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cells suspended in bodily fluids are routinely analyzed by cytopathologists as a means of diagnosing malignancies and other diseases. The physical and morphological properties of these suspended cells are evaluated in making diagnostic decisions, which often requires manual concentration, staining, and washing procedures to extract information about intracellular architecture. The need to manually prepare slides for analysis by a cytopathologist is a labor-intensive process, which is ripe for additional automation to reduce costs but also to potentially provide more repeatable and improved accuracy in diagnoses. We have developed a microfluidic system to perform several steps in the preparation of samples for cytopathology that (i) automates colorimetric staining on-chip, and (ii) images cells in flow, as well as provides (iii) additional quantitative analyses of captured images to aid cytopathologists. A flow-through approach provides benefits by allowing staining and imaging to be performed in a continuous, integrated manner, which also overcomes previous challenges with in-suspension colorimetric staining. We envision such a tool may reduce costs and aid cytopathologists in identifying rare or characteristic cells of interest by providing isolated images along with quantitative metrics on single cells from various rotational angles, allowing efficient determination of disease etiology.

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

4.7
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