Cited by 69Quantum Dots Synthesis And PropertiesNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology

A new perspective on in vitro assessment method for evaluating quantum dot toxicity by using microfluidics technology

Open access
Mahto, Sanjeev Kumar, Yoon, Tae Hyun, Rhee, Seog Woo·2010·Biomicrofluidics

Abstract

In this study, we demonstrate a new perspective on in vitro assessment method for evaluating quantum dot (QD) toxicity by using microfluidics technology. A new biomimetic approach, based on the flow exposure condition, was applied in order to characterize the cytotoxic potential of QD. In addition, the outcomes obtained from the flow exposure condition were compared to those of the static exposure condition. An in vitro cell array system was established that used an integrated multicompartmented microfluidic device to develop a sensitive flow exposure condition. QDs modified with cetyltrimethyl ammonium bromide/trioctylphosphine oxide were used for the cytotoxicity assessment. The results suggested noticeable differences in the number of detached and deformed cells and the viability percentages between two different exposure conditions. The intracellular production of reactive oxygen species and release of cadmium were found to be the possible causes of QD-induced cytotoxicity, irrespective of the types of exposure condition. In contrast to the static exposure, the flow exposure apparently avoided the gravitational settling of particles and probably assisted in the homogeneous distribution of nanoparticles in the culture medium during exposure time. Moreover, the flow exposure condition resembled in vivo physiological conditions very closely, and thus, the flow exposure condition can offer potential advantages for nanotoxicity research.

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 · 10.1063/1.3486610

Cites

Statistics

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.

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 19 · Cited by 69

Authors
Mahto, S. K., Yoon, T. H., & Rhee, S. W.
Affiliations
  • Kongju National University (KR)
  • Hanyang University (KR)
Venue
Biomicrofluidics
Published
2010-09-01
Volume
4
Issue
3
ISSN
1932-1058 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2004294518
Cited by
69
References
19
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Biomicrofluidics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • The Royal Society of Chemistry’s Journals, Books and Databases (The Royal Society of Chemistry) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Korea Science and Engineering Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Quantum Dots Synthesis And Properties
  • Physical Sciences › Materials Science › Materials Chemistry › Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Environmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Keywords
quantum dots, nanoparticle toxicity, cytotoxicity, microfluidics, cetyltrimethylammonium bromide, trioctylphosphine oxide, cadmium release, reactive oxygen species, cell viability, nanoparticle distribution

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