Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 274

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Comparison of Biocompatibility and Adsorption Properties of Different Plastics for Advanced Microfluidic Cell and Tissue Culture Models

van Midwoud, Paul M., Janse, Arnout, Merema, Marjolijn T., Groothuis, Geny M. M., Verpoorte, Elisabeth·2012·Analytical Chemistry

Abstract

Microfluidic technology is providing new routes toward advanced cell and tissue culture models to better understand human biology and disease. Many advanced devices have been made from poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) to enable experiments, for example, to study drug metabolism by use of precision-cut liver slices, that are not possible with conventional systems. However, PDMS, a silicone rubber material, is very hydrophobic and tends to exhibit significant adsorption and absorption of hydrophobic drugs and their metabolites. Although glass could be used as an alternative, thermoplastics are better from a cost and fabrication perspective. Thermoplastic polymers (plastics) allow easy surface treatment and are generally transparent and biocompatible. This study focuses on the fabrication of biocompatible microfluidic devices with low adsorption properties from the thermoplastics poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), polystyrene (PS), polycarbonate (PC), and cyclic olefin copolymer (COC) as alternatives for PDMS devices. Thermoplastic surfaces were oxidized using UV-generated ozone or oxygen plasma to reduce adsorption of hydrophobic compounds. Surface hydrophilicity was assessed over 4 weeks by measuring the contact angle of water on the surface. The adsorption of 7-ethoxycoumarin, testosterone, and their metabolites was also determined after UV-ozone treatment. Biocompatibility was assessed by culturing human hepatoma (HepG2) cells on treated surfaces. Comparison of the adsorption properties and biocompatibility of devices in different plastics revealed that only UV-ozone-treated PC and COC devices satisfied both criteria. This paper lays an important foundation that will help researchers make informed decisions with respect to the materials they select for microfluidic cell-based culture experiments.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/ac300771z

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 274

Metadata

Authors
van Midwoud, P. M., Janse, A., Merema, M. T., Groothuis, G. M. M., & Verpoorte, E.
Venue
Analytical Chemistry
Published
2012-04-11
Volume
84
Issue
9
Pages
3938-3944
ISSN
  • 0003-2700 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6882
OpenAlex
W1974663770
Cited by
274
References
28
FWCI
7.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.