Download PDF
Semin Thromb Hemost 2020; 46(05): 622-636
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1710340
Review Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

A Review of Design Considerations for Hemocompatibility within Microfluidic Systems

Crispin Szydzik
1   The Australian Centre for Blood Diseases, Monash University, Alfred Medical Research and Educational Precinct, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
,
Rose J. Brazilek
1   The Australian Centre for Blood Diseases, Monash University, Alfred Medical Research and Educational Precinct, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
,
Warwick S. Nesbitt
1   The Australian Centre for Blood Diseases, Monash University, Alfred Medical Research and Educational Precinct, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
30 June 2020 (online)

    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

The manipulation of blood within in vitro environments presents a persistent challenge, due to the highly reactive nature of blood, and its multifaceted response to material contact, changes in environmental conditions, and stimulation during handling. Microfluidic Lab-on-Chip systems offer the promise of robust point-of-care diagnostic tools and sophisticated research platforms. The capacity for precise control of environmental and experimental conditions afforded by microfluidic technologies presents unique opportunities that are particularly relevant to research and clinical applications requiring the controlled manipulation of blood. A critical bottleneck impeding the translation of existing Lab-on-Chip technology from laboratory bench to the clinic is the ability to reliably handle relatively small blood samples without negatively impacting blood composition or function. This review explores design considerations critical to the development of microfluidic systems intended for use with whole blood from an engineering perspective. Material hemocompatibility is briefly explored, encompassing common microfluidic device materials, as well as surface modification strategies intended to improve hemocompatibility. Operational hemocompatibility, including shear-induced effects, temperature dependence, and gas interactions are explored, microfluidic sample preparation methodologies are introduced, as well as current techniques for on-chip manipulation of the whole blood. Finally, methods of assessing hemocompatibility are briefly introduced, with an emphasis on primary hemostasis and platelet function.

Keywords

microfluidic - hemocompatibility - blood - hemodynamic - platelet function
 

  • References

  • 1 Silberring J, Ciborowski P. Biomarker discovery and clinical proteomics. Trends Analyt Chem 2010; 29 (02) 128-128
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Luppa PB, Müller C, Schlichtiger A, Schlebusch H. Point-of-care testing (POCT): current techniques and future perspectives. Trends Analyt Chem 2011; 30 (06) 887-898
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Toner M, Irimia D. Blood-on-a-chip. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 2005; 7: 77-103
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Boyd-Moss M, Baratchi S, Di Venere M, Khoshmanesh K. Self-contained microfluidic systems: a review. Lab Chip 2016; 16 (17) 3177-3192
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Kim D, Finkenstaedt-Quinn S, Hurley KR, Buchman JT, Haynes CL. On-chip evaluation of platelet adhesion and aggregation upon exposure to mesoporous silica nanoparticles. Analyst (Lond) 2014; 139 (05) 906-913
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Brazilek RJ, Tovar-Lopez FJ, Wong AKT. , et al. Application of a strain rate gradient microfluidic device to von Willebrand's disease screening. Lab Chip 2017; 17 (15) 2595-2608
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Melin J, Quake SR. Microfluidic large-scale integration: the evolution of design rules for biological automation. Annu Rev Biophys Biomol Struct 2007; 36: 213-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Wang YI, Oleaga C, Long CJ. , et al. Self-contained, low-cost Body-on-a-Chip systems for drug development. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 2017; 242 (17) 1701-1713
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Du G, Fang Q, den Toonder JM. Microfluidics for cell-based high throughput screening platforms—a review. Anal Chim Acta 2016; 903: 36-50
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Jung W, Han J, Choi JW, Ahn CH. Point-of-care testing (POCT) diagnostic systems using microfluidic lab-on-a-chip technologies. Microelectron Eng 2015; 132: 46-57
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Pandey CM, Augustine S, Kumar S. , et al. Microfluidics based point-of-care diagnostics. Biotechnol J 2018; 13 (01) 1700047
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Weber M, Steinle H, Golombek S. , et al. Blood-contacting biomaterials: in vitro evaluation of the hemocompatibility. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2018; 6: 99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Behbahani M, Behr M, Hormes M, Steinseifer U. A review of computational fluid dynamics analysis of blood pumps. Eur J Appl Math 2009; 20 (04) 363-397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Braune S, Grunze M, Straub A, Jung F. Are there sufficient standards for the in vitro hemocompatibility testing of biomaterials?. Biointerphases 2013; 8 (01) 33
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bélanger MC, Marois Y. Hemocompatibility, biocompatibility, inflammatory and in vivo studies of primary reference materials low-density polyethylene and polydimethylsiloxane: a review. J Biomed Mater Res 2001; 58 (05) 467-477
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Weisenberg BA, Mooradian DL. Hemocompatibility of materials used in microelectromechanical systems: platelet adhesion and morphology in vitro. J Biomed Mater Res 2002; 60 (02) 283-291
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Williams DF. On the mechanisms of biocompatibility. Biomaterials 2008; 29 (20) 2941-2953
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Naahidi S, Jafari M, Edalat F, Raymond K, Khademhosseini A, Chen P. Biocompatibility of engineered nanoparticles for drug delivery. J Control Release 2013; 166 (02) 182-194
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Lemm W. The Reference Materials of the European Communities: Results of Hemocompatibility Tests. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media; 2013
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Maitz MF, Martins MCL, Grabow N. , et al. The blood compatibility challenge. Part 4: surface modification for hemocompatible materials: passive and active approaches to guide blood-material interactions. Acta Biomater 2019; 94: 33-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Sperling C, Fischer M, Maitz MF, Werner C. Blood coagulation on biomaterials requires the combination of distinct activation processes. Biomaterials 2009; 30 (27) 4447-4456
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Bi H, Zhong W, Meng S, Kong J, Yang P, Liu B. Construction of a biomimetic surface on microfluidic chips for biofouling resistance. Anal Chem 2006; 78 (10) 3399-3405
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Brash JL, Horbett TA, Latour RA, Tengvall P. The blood compatibility challenge. Part 2: protein adsorption phenomena governing blood reactivity. Acta Biomater 2019; 94: 11-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Gokaltun A, Yarmush ML, Asatekin A, Usta OB. Recent advances in nonbiofouling PDMS surface modification strategies applicable to microfluidic technology. Technology (Singap World Sci) 2017; 5 (01) 1-12
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Broos K, De Meyer SF, Feys HB, Vanhoorelbeke K, Deckmyn H. Blood platelet biochemistry. Thromb Res 2012; 129 (03) 245-249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Afshar-Kharghan V, Li CQ, Khoshnevis-Asl M, López JA. Kozak sequence polymorphism of the glycoprotein (GP) Ibalpha gene is a major determinant of the plasma membrane levels of the platelet GP Ib-IX-V complex. Blood 1999; 94 (01) 186-191
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Toepke MW, Beebe DJ. PDMS absorption of small molecules and consequences in microfluidic applications. Lab Chip 2006; 6 (12) 1484-1486
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Van Oeveren W. Obstacles in haemocompatibility testing. Scientifica 2013; 2013: 392584
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Hildenbrand SL, Lehmann HD, Wodarz R, Ziemer G, Wendel HP. PVC-plasticizer DEHP in medical products: do thin coatings really reduce DEHP leaching into blood?. Perfusion 2005; 20 (06) 351-357
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Haishima Y, Hayashi Y, Yagami T, Nakamura A. Elution of bisphenol-A from hemodialyzers consisting of polycarbonate and polysulfone resins. J Biomed Mater Res 2001; 58 (02) 209-215
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Amoako K, Gbyli R. Improving the hemocompatibility of biomedical polymers. In: Siedlecki CA. , ed. Hemocompatibility of Biomaterials for Clinical Applications. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Elsevier; 2018: 223-252
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Maitz MF. Applications of synthetic polymers in clinical medicine. Biosurf Biotribol 2015; 1 (03) 161-176
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Mukhopadhyay R. When PDMS Isn't the Best. Anal Chem 2007; 79 (09) 3248-3253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Voskerician G, Shive MS, Shawgo RS. , et al. Biocompatibility and biofouling of MEMS drug delivery devices. Biomaterials 2003; 24 (11) 1959-1967
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Berean K, Ou JZ, Nour M, Latham K. The effect of crosslinking temperature on the permeability of PDMS membranes: evidence of extraordinary CO2 and CH4 gas permeation. Separ Purif Tech 2014; 122: 96-104
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Halldorsson S, Lucumi E, Gómez-Sjöberg R, Fleming RMT. Advantages and challenges of microfluidic cell culture in polydimethylsiloxane devices. Biosens Bioelectron 2015; 63: 218-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Fan X, Jia C, Yang J. , et al. A microfluidic chip integrated with a high-density PDMS-based microfiltration membrane for rapid isolation and detection of circulating tumor cells. Biosens Bioelectron 2015; 71: 380-386
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Xiong L, Chen P, Zhou Q. Adhesion promotion between PDMS and glass by oxygen plasma pre-treatment. J Adhes Sci Technol 2014; 28 (11) 1046-1054
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Zang Y, Zang F, Di C-a, Zhu D. Advances of flexible pressure sensors toward artificial intelligence and health care applications. Mater Horiz 2015; 2 (02) 140-156
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Nagahashi K, Teramura Y, Takai M. Stable surface coating of silicone elastomer with phosphorylcholine and organosilane copolymer with cross-linking for repelling proteins. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2015; 134: 384-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Agaoglu S, Diep P, Martini M, Kt S, Baday M, Araci IE. Ultra-sensitive microfluidic wearable strain sensor for intraocular pressure monitoring. Lab Chip 2018; 18 (22) 3471-3483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Berean KJ, Ou JZ, Daeneke T. , et al. 2D MoS2 PDMS nanocomposites for NO2 separation. Small 2015; 11 (38) 5035-5040
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Bodas D, Khan-Malek C. Hydrophilization and hydrophobic recovery of PDMS by oxygen plasma and chemical treatment—an SEM investigation. Sens Actuators B Chem 2007; 123 (01) 368-373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Shirure VS, George SC. Design considerations to minimize the impact of drug absorption in polymer-based organ-on-a-chip platforms. Lab Chip 2017; 17 (04) 681-690
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Grover WH, Skelley AM, Liu CN, Lagali ET. Monolithic membrane valves and diaphragm pumps for practical large-scale integration into glass microfluidic devices. Sens Actuators B Chem 2003; 89 (03) 315-323
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Shokrieh MM, Mosalmani R, Omidi MJ. A strain-rate dependent micromechanical constitutive model for glass/epoxy composites. Compos Struct 2015; 121: 37-45
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Curcio M, Bonis AD, Teghil R, Santagata A. Composite Thin Films of RKKP Glass With Improved Mechanical Properties and Surface Roughness For Bone-Related Implants. Colophon; 2016: 45
    Google Scholar
  • 48 Lee C-Y, Wang W-T, Liu C-C, Fu L-M. Passive mixers in microfluidic systems: a review. Chem Eng J 2016; 288: 146-160
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Grytsan A, Eriksson TSE, Watton PN, Gasser TC. Growth description for vessel wall adaptation: a thick-walled mixture model of abdominal aortic aneurysm evolution. Materials (Basel) 2017; 10 (09) 994
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Nunes PS, Ohlsson P, Sala OO, Kutter JP. Cyclic olefin polymers: emerging materials for lab-on-a-chip applications. Microfluid Nanofluidics 2010; 9 (2-3): 145-161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Tsao C-W, DeVoe DL. Bonding of thermoplastic polymer microfluidics. Microfluid Nanofluidics 2009; 6 (01) 1-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Becker H, Gärtner C. Polymer microfabrication technologies for microfluidic systems. Anal Bioanal Chem 2008; 390 (01) 89-111
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Bernard M, Jubeli E, Bakar J, Tortolano L, Saunier J, Yagoubi N. Biocompatibility assessment of cyclic olefin copolymers: impact of two additives on cytotoxicity, oxidative stress, inflammatory reactions, and hemocompatibility. J Biomed Mater Res A 2017; 105 (12) 3333-3349
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Roy S, Yue CY. Surface modification of COC microfluidic devices: a comparative study of nitrogen plasma treatment and its advantages over argon and oxygen plasma treatments. Plasma Process Polym 2011; 8 (05) 432-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Feng Y, Zhao H, Behl M, Lendlein A, Guo J, Yang D. Grafting of poly(ethylene glycol) monoacrylates on polycarbonateurethane by UV initiated polymerization for improving hemocompatibility. J Mater Sci Mater Med 2013; 24 (01) 61-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Ali U, Karim KJBA, Buang NA. A review of the properties and applications of poly (methyl methacrylate) (PMMA). Polym Rev 2015; 55 (04) 678-705
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Genes LI, , V Tolan N, Hulvey MK, Martin RS, Spence DM. Addressing a vascular endothelium array with blood components using underlying microfluidic channels. Lab Chip 2007; 7 (10) 1256-1259
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Neeves KB, Diamond SL. A membrane-based microfluidic device for controlling the flux of platelet agonists into flowing blood. Lab Chip 2008; 8 (05) 701-709
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Alrifaiy A, Lindahl OA, Ramser K. Polymer-based microfluidic devices for pharmacy, biology and tissue engineering. Polymers (Basel) 2012; 4 (03) 1349-1398
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Chianéa T, Cardot PJ, Assidjo E, Monteil J, Clarot I, Krausz P. Field- and flow-dependent trapping of red blood cells on polycarbonate accumulation wall in sedimentation field-flow fractionation. J Chromatogr B Biomed Sci Appl 1999; 734 (01) 91-99
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Toh A, Wang Z, Wang Z. Ambient hot embossing of polycarbonate, poly-methyl methacrylate and cyclic olefin copolymer for microfluidic applications. Paper presented at: 2009 Symposium on Design, Test, Integration & Packaging of MEMS/MOEMS; 2009 IEEE; April 2009; Rome, Italy
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Nge PN, Rogers CI, Woolley AT. Advances in microfluidic materials, functions, integration, and applications. Chem Rev 2013; 113 (04) 2550-2583
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Sajiki J, Yonekubo J. Leaching of bisphenol A (BPA) to seawater from polycarbonate plastic and its degradation by reactive oxygen species. Chemosphere 2003; 51 (01) 55-62
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Vandenberg LN, Hauser R, Marcus M, Olea N, Welshons WV. Human exposure to bisphenol A (BPA). Reprod Toxicol 2007; 24 (02) 139-177
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Lu B, Xu T, Zheng S, Goldkom A, Tai Y-C. Parylene membrane slot filter for the capture, analysis and culture of viable circulating tumor cells. Paper presented at: 2010 IEEE 23rd International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS 2010); January 2010; Wanchai, Hong Kong
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Yu L, Kim BJ, Meng E. Chronically implanted pressure sensors: challenges and state of the field. Sensors (Basel) 2014; 14 (11) 20620-20644
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Trantidou T, Prodromakis T, Toumazou C. Oxygen plasma induced hydrophilicity of Parylene-C thin films. Appl Surf Sci 2012; 261: 43-51
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Chang TY, Yadav VG, De Leo S. , et al. Cell and protein compatibility of parylene-C surfaces. Langmuir 2007; 23 (23) 11718-11725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Friend J, Yeo L. Fabrication of microfluidic devices using polydimethylsiloxane. Biomicrofluidics 2010; 4 (02) 026502
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 Reynolds M, Elias A, Elliott DG, Backhouse C. Variation of thermal and mechanical properties of KMPR due to processing parameters. J Micromech Microeng 2012; 22 (12) 125023
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 71 Prokop C, Schoenhardt S, Mahmud T, Mitchell A. , et al. Bonding of SU-8 films onto KMPR structures for microfluidic, air-suspended photonic and optofluidic applications. J Micromech Microeng 2016; 26 (05) 055001
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 72 Convert L, Baril FG, Boisselle V. , et al. Blood compatible microfluidic system for pharmacokinetic studies in small animals. Lab Chip 2012; 12 (22) 4683-4692
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 73 Convert L, Chabot V, Zermatten PJ, Karnutsch C. Passivation of KMPR microfluidic channels with bovine serum albumin (BSA) for improved hemocompatibility characterized with metal-clad waveguides. Sens Actuators B Chem 2012; 173: 447-454
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 74 Werner C, Maitz MF, Sperling C. Current strategies towards hemocompatible coatings. J Mater Chem 2007; 17 (32) 3376-3384
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 75 Fischer M, Maitz MF, Werner C. Coatings for biomaterials to improve hemocompatibility. In: Siedlecki CA. , ed. Hemocompatibility of Biomaterials for Clinical Applications. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Elsevier; 2018: 163-190
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 76 Hasan A, Pandey LM. Polymers, surface-modified polymers, and self-assembled monolayers as surface-modifying agents for biomaterials. Polym Plast Technol Eng 2015; 54 (13) 1358-1378
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 77 Goodman SL, Cooper SL, Albrecht RM. The effects of substrate-adsorbed albumin on platelet spreading. J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 1991; 2 (02) 147-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 78 Pillai GJ, Greeshma MM, Menon D. Impact of poly(lactic-co-glycolic acid) nanoparticle surface charge on protein, cellular and haematological interactions. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2015; 136: 1058-1066
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 79 Rabe M, Verdes D, Seeger S. Understanding protein adsorption phenomena at solid surfaces. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 2011; 162 (1-2): 87-106
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 80 Zarur AJ, Mehenti NZ, Heibel AT, Ying JY. Phase behavior, structure, and applications of reverse microemulsions stabilized by nonionic surfactants. Langmuir 2000; 16 (24) 9168-9176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 81 Wong I, Ho C-M. Surface molecular property modifications for poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) based microfluidic devices. Microfluid Nanofluidics 2009; 7 (03) 291-306
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 82 Abdallah B, Ros A. Surface coatings for microfluidic-based biomedical devices. In: Li XJ, Zhou Y. , eds. Microfluidic Devices for Biomedical Applications. Elsevier; 2013: 63-99
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 83 Jenkins CS, Packham MA, Kinlough-Rathbone RL, Mustard JF. Interactions of polylysine with platelets. Blood 1971; 37 (04) 395-412
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 84 Zhong D, Jiao Y, Zhang Y. , et al. Effects of the gene carrier polyethyleneimines on structure and function of blood components. Biomaterials 2013; 34 (01) 294-305
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 85 Chou T-C, Fu E, Wu CJ, Yeh JH. Chitosan enhances platelet adhesion and aggregation. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2003; 302 (03) 480-483
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 86 Tosatti S, De Paul SM, Askendal A. , et al. Peptide functionalized poly(L-lysine)-g-poly(ethylene glycol) on titanium: resistance to protein adsorption in full heparinized human blood plasma. Biomaterials 2003; 24 (27) 4949-4958
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 87 Dong P, Hao W, Wang Z, Wang T. Fabrication and biocompatibility of polyethyleneimine/heparin self-assembly coating on NiTi alloy. Thin Solid Films 2008; 516 (16) 5168-5171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 88 Balan V, Verestiuc L. Strategies to improve chitosan hemocompatibility: a review. Eur Polym J 2014; 53: 171-188
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 89 Blaszykowski C, Sheikh S, Thompson M. Surface chemistry to minimize fouling from blood-based fluids. Chem Soc Rev 2012; 41 (17) 5599-5612
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 90 Yu ZTF, Joseph JG, Liu SX. , et al. Centrifugal microfluidics for sorting immune cells from whole blood. Sens Actuators B Chem 2017; 245: 1050-1061
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 91 Ulman A. Formation and structure of self-assembled monolayers. Chem Rev 1996; 96 (04) 1533-1554
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 92 Love JC, Estroff LA, Kriebel JK, Nuzzo RG, Whitesides GM. Self-assembled monolayers of thiolates on metals as a form of nanotechnology. Chem Rev 2005; 105 (04) 1103-1169
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 93 Sperling C, Schweiss RB, Streller U, Werner C. In vitro hemocompatibility of self-assembled monolayers displaying various functional groups. Biomaterials 2005; 26 (33) 6547-6557
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 94 de los Santos Pereira A, Sheikh S, Blaszykowski C. , et al. Antifouling polymer brushes displaying antithrombogenic surface properties. Biomacromolecules 2016; 17 (03) 1179-1185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 95 Hasan A, Pandey L. Self-assembled monolayers in biomaterials. In: Narayan R. , ed. Nanobiomaterials. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Elsevier; 2018: 137-178
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 96 Kidambi S, Chan C, Lee I. Selective depositions on polyelectrolyte multilayers: self-assembled monolayers of m-dPEG acid as molecular template. J Am Chem Soc 2004; 126 (14) 4697-4703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 97 Zhang S. Biological and Biomedical Coatings Handbook: Applications. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press; 2016
    Google Scholar
  • 98 Leung JM, Berry LR, Atkinson HM. , et al. Surface modification of poly (dimethylsiloxane) with a covalent antithrombin–heparin complex for the prevention of thrombosis: use of polydopamine as bonding agent. J Mater Chem B Mater Biol Med 2015; 3 (29) 6032-6036
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 99 Thorslund S, Sanchez J, Larsson R, Nikolajeff F, Bergquist J. Bioactive heparin immobilized onto microfluidic channels in poly(dimethylsiloxane) results in hydrophilic surface properties. Colloids Surf B Biointerfaces 2005; 46 (04) 240-247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 100 Jackson SP. The growing complexity of platelet aggregation. Blood 2007; 109 (12) 5087-5095
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 101 Casa LDC, Deaton DH, Ku DN. Role of high shear rate in thrombosis. J Vasc Surg 2015; 61 (04) 1068-1080
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 102 Jafarnejad M, Cromer WE, Kaunas RR, Zhang SL, Zawieja DC, Moore Jr JE. Measurement of shear stress-mediated intracellular calcium dynamics in human dermal lymphatic endothelial cells. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 2015; 308 (07) H697-H706
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 103 Philo JS, Arakawa T. Mechanisms of protein aggregation. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 2009; 10 (04) 348-351
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 104 Maa YF, Hsu CC. Protein denaturation by combined effect of shear and air-liquid interface. Biotechnol Bioeng 1997; 54 (06) 503-512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 105 Tsai H-M, Sussman II, Nagel RL. Shear stress enhances the proteolysis of von Willebrand factor in normal plasma. Blood 1994; 83 (08) 2171-2179
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 106 Schneider SW, Nuschele S, Wixforth A. , et al. Shear-induced unfolding triggers adhesion of von Willebrand factor fibers. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2007; 104 (19) 7899-7903
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 107 Ruggeri ZM. Platelet adhesion under flow. Microcirculation 2009; 16 (01) 58-83
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 108 Nesbitt WS, Westein E, Tovar-Lopez FJ. , et al. A shear gradient-dependent platelet aggregation mechanism drives thrombus formation. Nat Med 2009; 15 (06) 665-673
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 109 Lanotte L, Mauer J, Mendez S. , et al. Red cells' dynamic morphologies govern blood shear thinning under microcirculatory flow conditions. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2016; 113 (47) 13289-13294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 110 Yilmaz F, Gundogdu MY. A critical review on blood flow in large arteries; relevance to blood rheology, viscosity models, and physiologic conditions. Korea-Australia Rheol J 2008; 20 (04) 197-211
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 111 Arwatz G, Smits AJ. A viscoelastic model of shear-induced hemolysis in laminar flow. Biorheology 2013; 50 (1-2): 45-55
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 112 Leverett LB, Hellums JD, Alfrey CP, Lynch EC. Red blood cell damage by shear stress. Biophys J 1972; 12 (03) 257-273
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 113 Horobin JT, Sabapathy S, Simmonds MJ. Repetitive supra-physiological shear stress impairs red blood cell deformability and induces hemolysis. Artif Organs 2017; 41 (11) 1017-1025
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 114 Zhao H, Shaqfeh ES. Shear-induced platelet margination in a microchannel. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys 2011; 83 (6 Pt 1): 061924
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 115 Barshtein G, Wajnblum D, Yedgar S. Kinetics of linear rouleaux formation studied by visual monitoring of red cell dynamic organization. Biophys J 2000; 78 (05) 2470-2474
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 116 Moazzam F, DeLano FA, Zweifach BW, Schmid-Schönbein GW. The leukocyte response to fluid stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 1997; 94 (10) 5338-5343
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 117 Coughlin MF, Schmid-Schönbein GW. Pseudopod projection and cell spreading of passive leukocytes in response to fluid shear stress. Biophys J 2004; 87 (03) 2035-2042
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 118 Lawrence MB, Kansas GS, Kunkel EJ, Ley K. Threshold levels of fluid shear promote leukocyte adhesion through selectins (CD62L,P,E). J Cell Biol 1997; 136 (03) 717-727
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 119 Sperandio M, Pickard J, Unnikrishnan S, Acton ST, Ley K. Analysis of leukocyte rolling in vivo and in vitro. Methods Enzymol 2006; 416: 346-371
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 120 Lu H, Soria C, Cramer EM. , et al. Temperature dependence of plasmin-induced activation or inhibition of human platelets. Blood 1991; 77 (05) 996-1005
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 121 Blok SLJ, Engels GE, van Oeveren W. In vitro hemocompatibility testing: the importance of fresh blood. Biointerphases 2016; 11 (02) 029802
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 122 Wolberg AS, Meng ZH, Monroe III DM, Hoffman M. A systematic evaluation of the effect of temperature on coagulation enzyme activity and platelet function. J Trauma 2004; 56 (06) 1221-1228
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 123 Kermode JC, Zheng Q, Milner EP. Marked temperature dependence of the platelet calcium signal induced by human von Willebrand factor. Blood 1999; 94 (01) 199-207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 124 Waugh R, Evans EA. Thermoelasticity of red blood cell membrane. Biophys J 1979; 26 (01) 115-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 125 Kim J, Lee H, Shin S. Advances in the measurement of red blood cell deformability: a brief review. J Cell Biotechnol 2015; 1 (01) 63-79
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 126 Neumann F-J, Schmid-Schönbein H, Ohlenbusch H. Temperature-dependence of red cell aggregation. Pflugers Arch 1987; 408 (05) 524-530
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 127 Lim HJ, Lee YJ, Nam JH, Chung S, Shin S. Temperature-dependent threshold shear stress of red blood cell aggregation. J Biomech 2010; 43 (03) 546-550
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 128 Rosina J, Kvasnák E, Suta D, Kolárová H, Málek J, Krajci L. Temperature dependence of blood surface tension. Physiol Res 2007; 56 (01) (Suppl. 01) S93-S98
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 129 Jaspard F, Nadi M. Dielectric properties of blood: an investigation of temperature dependence. Physiol Meas 2002; 23 (03) 547-554
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 130 Bradley AF, Severinghaus JW, Stupfel M. Effect of temperature on PCO2 and PO2 of blood in vitro. J Appl Physiol 1956; 9 (02) 201-204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 131 Eckmann DM, Bowers S, Stecker M, Cheung AT. Hematocrit, volume expander, temperature, and shear rate effects on blood viscosity. Anesth Analg 2000; 91 (03) 539-545
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 132 Pinho D, Rodrigues RO, Faustino V, Yaginuma T, Exposto J, Lima R. Red blood cells radial dispersion in blood flowing through microchannels: the role of temperature. J Biomech 2016; 49 (11) 2293-2298
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 133 Biswas CK, Ramos JM, Agroyannis B, Kerr DN. Blood gas analysis: effect of air bubbles in syringe and delay in estimation. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1982; 284 (6320): 923-927
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 134 Haycox CL, Ratner BD. In vitro platelet interactions in whole human blood exposed to biomaterial surfaces: insights on blood compatibility. J Biomed Mater Res 1993; 27 (09) 1181-1193
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 135 Kalman PG, McCullough DA, Ward CA. Evacuation of microscopic air bubbles from Dacron reduces complement activation and platelet aggregation. J Vasc Surg 1990; 11 (04) 591-598
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 136 Gong J, Larsson R, Ekdahl KN, Mollnes TE, Nilsson U, Nilsson B. Tubing loops as a model for cardiopulmonary bypass circuits: both the biomaterial and the blood-gas phase interfaces induce complement activation in an in vitro model. J Clin Immunol 1996; 16 (04) 222-229
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 137 Elam J-H, Nygren H. Adsorption of coagulation proteins from whole blood on to polymer materials: relation to platelet activation. Biomaterials 1992; 13 (01) 3-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 138 Mu X, Zheng W, Sun J, Zhang W, Jiang X. Microfluidics for manipulating cells. Small 2013; 9 (01) 9-21
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 139 Kim L, Toh YC, Voldman J, Yu H. A practical guide to microfluidic perfusion culture of adherent mammalian cells. Lab Chip 2007; 7 (06) 681-694
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 140 Karlsson JM, Gazin M, Laakso S. , et al. Active liquid degassing in microfluidic systems. Lab Chip 2013; 13 (22) 4366-4373
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 141 Monahan J, Gewirth AA, Nuzzo RG. A method for filling complex polymeric microfluidic devices and arrays. Anal Chem 2001; 73 (13) 3193-3197
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 142 Lochovsky C, Yasotharan S, Günther A. Bubbles no more: in-plane trapping and removal of bubbles in microfluidic devices. Lab Chip 2012; 12 (03) 595-601
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 143 Forget AL, Dombrowski CC, Amitani I, Kowalczykowski SC. Exploring protein-DNA interactions in 3D using in situ construction, manipulation and visualization of individual DNA dumbbells with optical traps, microfluidics and fluorescence microscopy. Nat Protoc 2013; 8 (03) 525-538
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 144 Mason TJ, Mason TJ. Sonochemistry. Vol. 2. New York, NY: Oxford University Press; 1999
    Google Scholar
  • 145 Shatalov V, Noga I, Zinchenko A. Degassing of bioliquids in low electromagnetic fields. Elec J Biol 2010;6(03):67–72
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 146 Xu L, Lee H, Jetta D, Oh KW. Vacuum-driven power-free microfluidics utilizing the gas solubility or permeability of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS). Lab Chip 2015; 15 (20) 3962-3979
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 147 Lee C-J, Hsu Y-H. Vacuum pouch microfluidic system and its application for thin-film micromixers. Lab Chip 2019; 19 (17) 2834-2843
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 148 Song Q, Sun J, Mu Y, Xu Y. A new method for polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) microfluidic chips to maintain vacuum-driven power using Parylene C. Sens Actuators B Chem 2018; 256: 1122-1130
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 149 Dimov IK, Basabe-Desmonts L, Garcia-Cordero JL. , et al. Stand-alone self-powered integrated microfluidic blood analysis system (SIMBAS). Lab Chip 2011; 11 (05) 845-850
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 150 Sung JH, Shuler ML. Prevention of air bubble formation in a microfluidic perfusion cell culture system using a microscale bubble trap. Biomed Microdevices 2009; 11 (04) 731-738
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 151 Zheng W, Wang Z, Zhang W, Jiang X. A simple PDMS-based microfluidic channel design that removes bubbles for long-term on-chip culture of mammalian cells. Lab Chip 2010; 10 (21) 2906-2910
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 152 Wang Y, Lee D, Zhang L. , et al. Systematic prevention of bubble formation and accumulation for long-term culture of pancreatic islet cells in microfluidic device. Biomed Microdevices 2012; 14 (02) 419-426
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 153 Xu J, Vaillant R, Attinger D. Use of a porous membrane for gas bubble removal in microfluidic channels: physical mechanisms and design criteria. Microfluid Nanofluidics 2010; 9 (4-5): 765-772
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 154 Skelley AM, Voldman J. An active bubble trap and debubbler for microfluidic systems. Lab Chip 2008; 8 (10) 1733-1737
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 155 Kang JH, Kim YC, Park J-K. Analysis of pressure-driven air bubble elimination in a microfluidic device. Lab Chip 2008; 8 (01) 176-178
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 156 Liu C, Thompson JA, Bau HH. A membrane-based, high-efficiency, microfluidic debubbler. Lab Chip 2011; 11 (09) 1688-1693
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 157 Braune S, Walter M, Schulze F, Lendlein A, Jung F. Changes in platelet morphology and function during 24 hours of storage. Clin Hemorheol Microcirc 2014; 58 (01) 159-170
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 158 Seyfert U, Jung F. Criteria and principles of in vitro hemocompatibility testing according to the ISO 10993 (4). Transfus Med Hemother 2000; 27 (06) 317-322
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 159 Tripathi S, Kumar YVBV, Prabhakar A, Joshi SS, Agarwal A. Passive blood plasma separation at the microscale: a review of design principles and microdevices. J Micromech Microeng 2015; 25 (08) 083001
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 160 Fernández Gavela A, Grajales García D, Ramirez JC, Lechuga LM. Last advances in silicon-based optical biosensors. Sensors (Basel) 2016; 16 (03) 285
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 161 Rackus DG, Shamsi MH, Wheeler AR. Electrochemistry, biosensors and microfluidics: a convergence of fields. Chem Soc Rev 2015; 44 (15) 5320-5340
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 162 Sonker M, Sahore V, Woolley AT. Recent advances in microfluidic sample preparation and separation techniques for molecular biomarker analysis: a critical review. Anal Chim Acta 2017; 986: 1-11
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 163 Femia EA, Scavone M, Lecchi A, Cattaneo M. Effect of platelet count on platelet aggregation measured with impedance aggregometry (Multiplate™ analyzer) and with light transmission aggregometry. J Thromb Haemost 2013; 11 (12) 2193-2196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 164 Paniccia R, Priora R, Liotta AA, Abbate R. Platelet function tests: a comparative review. Vasc Health Risk Manag 2015; 11: 133-148
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 165 van Werkum JW, van der Stelt CA, Seesing TH, Hackeng CM, ten Berg JM. A head-to-head comparison between the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay and light transmittance aggregometry for monitoring the individual platelet response to clopidogrel in patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention. J Thromb Haemost 2006; 4 (11) 2516-2518
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 166 Seah YFS, Hu H, Merten CA. Microfluidic single-cell technology in immunology and antibody screening. Mol Aspects Med 2018; 59: 47-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 167 Shields IV CW, Reyes CD, López GP. Microfluidic cell sorting: a review of the advances in the separation of cells from debulking to rare cell isolation. Lab Chip 2015; 15 (05) 1230-1249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 168 Kersaudy-Kerhoas M, Sollier E. Micro-scale blood plasma separation: from acoustophoresis to egg-beaters. Lab Chip 2013; 13 (17) 3323-3346
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 169 Mielczarek WS, Obaje EA, Bachmann TT, Kersaudy-Kerhoas M. Microfluidic blood plasma separation for medical diagnostics: is it worth it?. Lab Chip 2016; 16 (18) 3441-3448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 170 Yu ZTF, Aw Yong KM, Fu J. Microfluidic blood cell sorting: now and beyond. Small 2014; 10 (09) 1687-1703
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 171 Maria MS, Chandra T, Sen A. Capillary flow-driven blood plasma separation and on-chip analyte detection in microfluidic devices. Microfluid Nanofluidics 2017; 21 (04) 72
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 172 VanDelinder V, Groisman A. Separation of plasma from whole human blood in a continuous cross-flow in a molded microfluidic device. Anal Chem 2006; 78 (11) 3765-3771
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 173 Mach AJ, Di Carlo D. Continuous scalable blood filtration device using inertial microfluidics. Biotechnol Bioeng 2010; 107 (02) 302-311
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 174 Lenshof A, Ahmad-Tajudin A, Järås K. , et al. Acoustic whole blood plasmapheresis chip for prostate specific antigen microarray diagnostics. Anal Chem 2009; 81 (15) 6030-6037
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 175 Szydzik C, Khoshmanesh K, Mitchell A, Karnutsch C. Microfluidic platform for separation and extraction of plasma from whole blood using dielectrophoresis. Biomicrofluidics 2015; 9 (06) 064120
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 176 Heath JR, Ribas A, Mischel PS. Single-cell analysis tools for drug discovery and development. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2016; 15 (03) 204-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 177 Wu J, Lin J-M. Microfluidic technology for single-cell capture and isolation. In: Microfluidics for Single-Cell Analysis. Singapore: Springer; 2019: 27-51
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 178 Mazutis L, Gilbert J, Ung WL, Weitz DA, Griffiths AD, Heyman JA. Single-cell analysis and sorting using droplet-based microfluidics. Nat Protoc 2013; 8 (05) 870-891
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 179 Prakadan SM, Shalek AK, Weitz DA. Scaling by shrinking: empowering single-cell 'omics' with microfluidic devices. Nat Rev Genet 2017; 18 (06) 345-361
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 180 Song Y, Tian T, Shi Y. , et al. Enrichment and single-cell analysis of circulating tumor cells. Chem Sci (Camb) 2017; 8 (03) 1736-1751
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 181 Gossett DR, Weaver WM, Mach AJ. , et al. Label-free cell separation and sorting in microfluidic systems. Anal Bioanal Chem 2010; 397 (08) 3249-3267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 182 Kuntaegowdanahalli SS, Bhagat AA, Kumar G, Papautsky I. Inertial microfluidics for continuous particle separation in spiral microchannels. Lab Chip 2009; 9 (20) 2973-2980
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 183 Yan S, Zhang J, Yuan D, Li W. Hybrid microfluidics combined with active and passive approaches for continuous cell separation. Electrophoresis 2017; 38 (02) 238-249
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 184 Li X, Soler M, Szydzik C. , et al. Label-free optofluidic nanobiosensor enables real-time analysis of single-cell cytokine secretion. Small 2018; 14 (26) e1800698
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 185 Joensson HN, Samuels ML, Brouzes ER. , et al. Detection and analysis of low-abundance cell-surface biomarkers using enzymatic amplification in microfluidic droplets. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2009; 48 (14) 2518-2521
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 186 Sinkala E, Sollier-Christen E, Renier C. , et al. Profiling protein expression in circulating tumour cells using microfluidic western blotting. Nat Commun 2017; 8: 14622
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 187 Kaiser M, Jug F, Julou T. , et al. Monitoring single-cell gene regulation under dynamically controllable conditions with integrated microfluidics and software. Nat Commun 2018; 9 (01) 212
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 188 Kimmerling RJ, Lee Szeto G, Li JW. , et al. A microfluidic platform enabling single-cell RNA-seq of multigenerational lineages. Nat Commun 2016; 7: 10220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 189 Huang L, Bian S, Cheng Y. , et al. Microfluidics cell sample preparation for analysis: advances in efficient cell enrichment and precise single cell capture. Biomicrofluidics 2017; 11 (01) 011501
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 190 Antfolk M, Laurell T. Continuous flow microfluidic separation and processing of rare cells and bioparticles found in blood—a review. Anal Chim Acta 2017; 965: 9-35
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 191 Shen Y, Yalikun Y, Tanaka Y. Recent advances in microfluidic cell sorting systems. Sens Actuators B Chem 2018; 282: 268-281
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 192 Magnusson C, Augustsson P, Lenshof A, Ceder Y, Laurell T, Lilja H. Clinical-scale cell-surface-marker independent acoustic microfluidic enrichment of tumor cells from blood. Anal Chem 2017; 89 (22) 11954-11961
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 193 Quang LD, Thuy HTT, Tung BT. , et al. Dielectrophoresis microfluidic enrichment platform with built-in capacitive sensor for rare tumor cell detection. Biochip J 2018; 12 (02) 114-122
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 194 Lin S, Zhi X, Chen D. , et al. A flyover style microfluidic chip for highly purified magnetic cell separation. Biosens Bioelectron 2019; 129: 175-181
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 195 Keloth A, Anderson O, Risbridger D, Paterson L. Single cell isolation using optical tweezers. Micromachines (Basel) 2018; 9 (09) 434
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 196 Kim G-Y, Han J-I, Park J-K. Inertial microfluidics-based cell sorting. Biochip J 2018; 12 (04) 257-267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 197 Khetani S, Mohammadi M, Nezhad AS. Filter-based isolation, enrichment, and characterization of circulating tumor cells. Biotechnol Bioeng 2018; 115 (10) 2504-2529
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 198 Zinggeler M, Brandstetter T, Rühe J. Biophysical insights on the enrichment of cancer cells from whole blood by (affinity) filtration. Sci Rep 2019; 9 (01) 1246
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 199 Yamada H, Yoshida Y, Terada N, Hagihara S, Komatsu T, Terasawa A. Fabrication of gravity-driven microfluidic device. Rev Sci Instrum 2008; 79 (12) 124301
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 200 Cheng Y, Ye X, Ma Z, Xie S, Wang W. High-throughput and clogging-free microfluidic filtration platform for on-chip cell separation from undiluted whole blood. Biomicrofluidics 2016; 10 (01) 014118
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 201 Brassard D, Geissler M, Descarreaux M. , et al. Extraction of nucleic acids from blood: unveiling the potential of active pneumatic pumping in centrifugal microfluidics for integration and automation of sample preparation processes. Lab Chip 2019; 19 (11) 1941-1952
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 202 Travagliati M, Shilton RJ, Pagliazzi M, Tonazzini I, Beltram F, Cecchini M. Acoustofluidics and whole-blood manipulation in surface acoustic wave counterflow devices. Anal Chem 2014; 86 (21) 10633-10638
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 203 Park J, Park J-K. Finger-actuated microfluidic device for the blood cross-matching test. Lab Chip 2018; 18 (08) 1215-1222
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 204 Cai H, Stott MA, Ozcelik D, Parks JW, Hawkins AR, Schmidt H. On-chip wavelength multiplexed detection of cancer DNA biomarkers in blood. Biomicrofluidics 2016; 10 (06) 064116
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 205 Li J, Chang KW, Wang CH, Yang CH, Shiesh SC, Lee GB. On-chip, aptamer-based sandwich assay for detection of glycated hemoglobins via magnetic beads. Biosens Bioelectron 2016; 79: 887-893
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 206 Szydzik C, Brazilek RJ, Khoshmanesh K. , et al. Elastomeric microvalve geometry affects haemocompatibility. Lab Chip 2018; 18 (12) 1778-1792
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 207 Szydzik C, Brazilek RJ, Akbaridoust F. , et al. active micropump-mixer for rapid antiplatelet drug screening in whole blood. Anal Chem 2019; 91 (16) 10830-10839
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 208 Zhong JF, Chen Y, Marcus JS. , et al. A microfluidic processor for gene expression profiling of single human embryonic stem cells. Lab Chip 2008; 8 (01) 68-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 209 King KR, Wang S, Irimia D, Jayaraman A, Toner M, Yarmush ML. A high-throughput microfluidic real-time gene expression living cell array. Lab Chip 2007; 7 (01) 77-85
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 210 Zhang C, Xing D, Li Y. Micropumps, microvalves, and micromixers within PCR microfluidic chips: advances and trends. Biotechnol Adv 2007; 25 (05) 483-514
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 211 Lee J, Estlack Z, Somaweera H, Wang X, Lacerda CMR, Kim J. A microfluidic cardiac flow profile generator for studying the effect of shear stress on valvular endothelial cells. Lab Chip 2018; 18 (19) 2946-2954
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 212 Chen Y, Chan HN, Michael SA. , et al. A microfluidic circulatory system integrated with capillary-assisted pressure sensors. Lab Chip 2017; 17 (04) 653-662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 213 Leung K, Zahn H, Leaver T. , et al. A programmable droplet-based microfluidic device applied to multiparameter analysis of single microbes and microbial communities. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2012; 109 (20) 7665-7670
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 214 Szydzik C, Gavela AF, Herranz S. , et al. An automated optofluidic biosensor platform combining interferometric sensors and injection moulded microfluidics. Lab Chip 2017; 17 (16) 2793-2804
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 215 Kim J, Stockton AM, Jensen EC, Mathies RA. Pneumatically actuated microvalve circuits for programmable automation of chemical and biochemical analysis. Lab Chip 2016; 16 (05) 812-819
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 216 Szydzik C, Niego B, Dalzell G, Knoerzer M. Fabrication of complex PDMS microfluidic structures and embedded functional substrates by one-step injection moulding. RSC Adv 2016; 6 (91) 87988-87994
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 217 Harris LF, Killard AJ. Microfluidics in coagulation monitoring devices: a mini review. Anal Methods 2018; 10 (30) 3714-3719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 218 Kumar V, Packirisamy G, Lakshmanan VK, Pandiyaraj KN. Surface analysis technique for assessing hemocompatibility of biomaterials. In: Siedlecki C. , ed. Hemocompatibility of Biomaterials for Clinical Applications. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Elsevier; 2018: 119-161
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 219 Sanak M, Jakieła B, Węgrzyn W. Assessment of hemocompatibility of materials with arterial blood flow by platelet functional tests. Bull Pol Acad Sci Tech Sci 2010; 58 (02) 317-322
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 220 Streller U, Sperling C, Hübner J, Hanke R, Werner C. Design and evaluation of novel blood incubation systems for in vitro hemocompatibility assessment of planar solid surfaces. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 2003; 66 (01) 379-390
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 221 Inglis DW, Morton KJ, Davis JA. , et al. Microfluidic device for label-free measurement of platelet activation. Lab Chip 2008; 8 (06) 925-931
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 222 Evander M, Ricco AJ, Morser J, Kovacs GT, Leung LL, Giovangrandi L. Microfluidic impedance cytometer for platelet analysis. Lab Chip 2013; 13 (04) 722-729
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 223 Li Z, Delaney MK, O'Brien KA, Du X. Signaling during platelet adhesion and activation. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 2010; 30 (12) 2341-2349
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 224 Varga-Szabo D, Braun A, Nieswandt B. Calcium signaling in platelets. J Thromb Haemost 2009; 7 (07) 1057-1066
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 225 Gutierrez E, Petrich BG, Shattil SJ, Ginsberg MH, Groisman A, Kasirer-Friede A. Microfluidic devices for studies of shear-dependent platelet adhesion. Lab Chip 2008; 8 (09) 1486-1495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 226 Banerjee D, Mazumder S, Kumar Sinha A. Involvement of nitric oxide on calcium mobilization and arachidonic acid pathway activation during platelet aggregation with different aggregating agonists. Int J Biomed Sci 2016; 12 (01) 25-35
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 227 Westein E, de Witt S, Lamers M, Cosemans JM, Heemskerk JW. Monitoring in vitro thrombus formation with novel microfluidic devices. Platelets 2012; 23 (07) 501-509
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 228 Branchford BR, Ng CJ, Neeves KB, Di Paola J. Microfluidic technology as an emerging clinical tool to evaluate thrombosis and hemostasis. Thromb Res 2015; 136 (01) 13-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 229 Jain A, Graveline A, Waterhouse A, Vernet A, Flaumenhaft R, Ingber DE. A shear gradient-activated microfluidic device for automated monitoring of whole blood haemostasis and platelet function. Nat Commun 2016; 7: 10176
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 230 Schoeman RM, Lehmann M, Neeves KB. Flow chamber and microfluidic approaches for measuring thrombus formation in genetic bleeding disorders. Platelets 2017; 28 (05) 463-471
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 231 Herbig BA, Yu X, Diamond SL. Using microfluidic devices to study thrombosis in pathological blood flows. Biomicrofluidics 2018; 12 (04) 042201
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 232 Ting LH, Feghhi S, Taparia N. , et al. Contractile forces in platelet aggregates under microfluidic shear gradients reflect platelet inhibition and bleeding risk. Nat Commun 2019; 10 (01) 1204
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 233 Kamath S, Blann AD, Lip GY. Platelet activation: assessment and quantification. Eur Heart J 2001; 22 (17) 1561-1571
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 234 Lu Q, Malinauskas RA. Comparison of two platelet activation markers using flow cytometry after in vitro shear stress exposure of whole human blood. Artif Organs 2011; 35 (02) 137-144
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 235 Lee KK, Ahn CH. A new on-chip whole blood/plasma separator driven by asymmetric capillary forces. Lab Chip 2013; 13 (16) 3261-3267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar