The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Characterization of a microfluidic in vitro model of the blood-brain barrier (μBBB)
Abstract
The blood-brain barrier (BBB), a unique selective barrier for the central nervous system (CNS), hinders the passage of most compounds to the CNS, complicating drug development. Innovative in vitro models of the BBB can provide useful insights into its role in CNS disease progression and drug delivery. Static transwell models lack fluidic shear stress, while the conventional dynamic in vitro BBB lacks a thin dual cell layer interface. To address both limitations, we developed a microfluidic blood-brain barrier (μBBB) which closely mimics the in vivo BBB with a dynamic environment and a comparatively thin culture membrane (10 μm). To test validity of the fabricated BBB model, μBBBs were cultured with b.End3 endothelial cells, both with and without co-cultured C8-D1A astrocytes, and their key properties were tested with optical imaging, trans-endothelial electrical resistance (TEER), and permeability assays. The resultant imaging of ZO-1 revealed clearly expressed tight junctions in b.End3 cells, Live/Dead assays indicated high cell viability, and astrocytic morphology of C8-D1A cells were confirmed by ESEM and GFAP immunostains. By day 3 of endothelial culture, TEER levels typically exceeded 250 Ω cm(2) in μBBB co-cultures, and 25 Ω cm(2) for transwell co-cultures. Instantaneous transient drop in TEER in response to histamine exposure was observed in real-time, followed by recovery, implying stability of the fabricated μBBB model. Resultant permeability coefficients were comparable to previous BBB models, and were significantly increased at higher pH (>10). These results demonstrate that the developed μBBB system is a valid model for some studies of BBB function and drug delivery.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The blood-brain barrier/neurovascular unit in health and disease
Hawkins, B. T., & Davis, T. P. (2005) · Pharmacological Reviews · doi:10.1124/pr.57.2.4 · Cited by 2,661
A new blood–brain barrier model using primary rat brain endothelial cells, pericytes and astrocytes
Nakagawa, S., Deli, M. A., Kawaguchi, H., Shimizudani, T., Shimono, T., Kittel, Á., Tanaka, K., & Niwa, M. (2009) · Neurochemistry International · doi:10.1016/j.neuint.2008.12.002 · Cited by 728
CNS Drug Delivery Systems: Novel Approaches
Pathan, S., Iqbal, Z., Zaidi, S., Talegaonkar, S., Vohra, D., Jain, G., Azeem, A., Jain, N., Lalani, J., Khar, R., et al. (2009) · Recent Patents on Drug Delivery & Formulation · doi:10.2174/187221109787158355 · Cited by 193
Cited by
Bhatia, S. N., & Ingber, D. E. (2014) · Nature Biotechnology · doi:10.1038/nbt.2989 · Cited by 3,305
Organs-on-chips at the frontiers of drug discovery
Esch, E. W., Bahinski, A., & Huh, D. (2015) · Nature Reviews Drug Discovery · doi:10.1038/nrd4539 · Cited by 1,185
The blood-brain barrier in systemic inflammation
Varatharaj, A., & Galea, I. (2017) · Brain, Behavior, and Immunity · doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2016.03.010 · Cited by 1,172
Advantages and challenges of microfluidic cell culture in polydimethylsiloxane devices
Halldorsson, S., Lucumi, E., Gómez-Sjöberg, R., & Fleming, R. M. T. (2015) · Biosensors and Bioelectronics · doi:10.1016/j.bios.2014.07.029 · Cited by 1,027
Advances in organ-on-a-chip engineering
Zhang, B., Korolj, A., Lai, B. F. L., & Radisic, M. (2018) · Nature Reviews Materials · doi:10.1038/s41578-018-0034-7 · Cited by 1,017
Metadata
- Authors
- Booth, R., & Kim, H.
- Venue
- Lab on a Chip
- Publisher
- Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC)
- Published
- 2012
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 1784
- ISSN
- 1473-0189 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-0197
- OpenAlex
- W1994812037
- Cited by
- 739
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 14.36
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Characterization of a microfluidic in vitro model of the blood-brain barrier (μBBB). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1039/c2lc40094d
- The paper
- Booth, R., & Kim, H. (2012). Characterization of a microfluidic in vitro model of the blood-brain barrier (μBBB). Lab on a Chip. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2lc40094d
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.