Warning: imagejpeg(C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\phplern\27101171
.jpg): Failed to open stream: No such file or directory in C:\Inetpub\vhosts\kidney.de\httpdocs\pget.php on line 117 Lab+Chip
2016 ; 16
(10
): 1720-42
Nephropedia Template TP
gab.com Text
Twit Text FOAVip
Twit Text #
English Wikipedia
The upcoming 3D-printing revolution in microfluidics
#MMPMID27101171
Bhattacharjee N
; Urrios A
; Kang S
; Folch A
Lab Chip
2016[May]; 16
(10
): 1720-42
PMID27101171
show ga
In the last two decades, the vast majority of microfluidic systems have been
built in poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) by soft lithography, a technique based on
PDMS micromolding. A long list of key PDMS properties have contributed to the
success of soft lithography: PDMS is biocompatible, elastomeric, transparent,
gas-permeable, water-impermeable, fairly inexpensive, copyright-free, and rapidly
prototyped with high precision using simple procedures. However, the fabrication
process typically involves substantial human labor, which tends to make PDMS
devices difficult to disseminate outside of research labs, and the layered
molding limits the 3D complexity of the devices that can be produced. 3D-printing
has recently attracted attention as a way to fabricate microfluidic systems due
to its automated, assembly-free 3D fabrication, rapidly decreasing costs, and
fast-improving resolution and throughput. Resins with properties approaching
those of PDMS are being developed. Here we review past and recent efforts in
3D-printing of microfluidic systems. We compare the salient features of PDMS
molding with those of 3D-printing and we give an overview of the critical
barriers that have prevented the adoption of 3D-printing by microfluidic
developers, namely resolution, throughput, and resin biocompatibility. We also
evaluate the various forces that are persuading researchers to abandon PDMS
molding in favor of 3D-printing in growing numbers.
free
free
free
