Lab-on-a-chip technologies for stem cell analysis

Trends in Biotechnology

Volumn 32, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 245-253

  Ertl, Peter ^a   Sticker, Drago ^a   Charwat, Verena ^b   Kasper, Cornelia ^b   Lepperdinger, Günter ^c  

^a AIT AUSTRIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Austria)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND LIFE SCIENCES   (Austria)

^c UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

Author keywords

Biosensors; Lab on a chip; Microfluidics; Stem cells

Indexed keywords

BIOSENSORS; CELL CULTURE; EMBEDDED SYSTEMS; MICROFLUIDICS; STEM CELLS;

CELL ANALYSIS; CELL BIOLOGY; CELL IDENTIFICATION; FUTURE APPLICATIONS; IN-VITRO DIAGNOSTIC; LAB-ON-A-CHIP TECHNOLOGY; MICRO-FLUIDIC DEVICES; SENSORY SYSTEM;

LAB-ON-A-CHIP;

CYTOLOGY; HUMAN; LAB ON A CHIP; MICROFLUIDIC ANALYSIS; PHYSIOLOGY; PROCEDURES; STEM CELL;

CYTOLOGICAL TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; LAB-ON-A-CHIP DEVICES; MICROFLUIDIC ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES; STEM CELLS;

EID: 84899476903     PISSN: 01677799     EISSN: 18793096     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tibtech.2014.03.004     Document Type: Review

References (84)

1. HTStec Stem Cells In Research & Drug Discovery Trends 2011 2012, HTStec Limited.
2. Korbling M., Estrov Z. Adult stem cells for tissue repair - a new therapeutic concept?. N. Engl. J. Med. 2003, 349:570-582.
3. Whitesides G.M. The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature 2006, 442:368-373.
4. Lutolf M.P., Blau H.M. Artificial stem cell niches. Adv. Mat. 2009, 21:3255-3268.
5. Lesher-Perez S.C., et al. Microfluidic systems: a new toolbox for pluripotent stem cells. Biotechnol. J. 2013, 8:180-191.
6. Gobaa S., et al. Artificial niche microarrays for probing single stem cell fate in high throughput. Nat. Method 2011, 8:949-955.
7. Engler A.J., et al. Matrix elasticity directs stem cell lineage specification. Cell 2006, 126:677-689.
8. Zaari N., et al. Photopolymerization in microfluidic gradient generators: microscale control of substrate compliance to manipulate cell response. Adv. Mater. 2004, 16:2133-2137.
9. Yim E.K.F., et al. Nanotopography-induced changes in focal adhesions, cytoskeletal organization, and mechanical properties of human mesenchymal stem cells. Biomat 2010, 31:1299-1306.
10. Rothbauer M., et al. Exploitation of s-layer anisotropy: pH-dependent nanolayer orientation for cellular micropatterning. ACS Nano 2013, 7:8020-8030.
11. Csete M. Oxygen in the cultivation of stem cells. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2005, 1049:1-8.
12. Huang G.Y., et al. Microfluidic hydrogels for tissue engineering. Biofab 2011, 3:012001.
13. Nge P.N., et al. Advances in microfluidic materials, functions, integration, and applications. Chem. Rev. 2013, 113:2550-2583.
14. Ren K., et al. New materials for microfluidics in biology. Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2014, 25:78-85.
15. Khademhosseini A., et al. Molded polyethylene glycol microstructures for capturing cells within microfluidic channels. Lab Chip 2004, 4:425-430.
16. Skelley A.M., et al. Microfluidic control of cell pairing and fusion. Nat. Method 2009, 6:147-152.
17. Kobel S.A., et al. Automated analysis of single stem cells in microfluidic traps. Lab Chip 2012, 12:2843-2849.
18. Gossett D.R., et al. Label-free cell separation and sorting in microfluidic systems. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2010, 397:3249-3267.
19. Autebert J., et al. Microfluidic: an innovative tool for efficient cell sorting. Methods 2012, 57:297-307.
20. Roda B., et al. Gravitational field-flow fractionation of human hemopoietic stem cells. J. Chromatogr. A 2009, 1216:9081-9087.
21. Zhang W., et al. Microfluidics separation reveals the stem-cell-like deformability of tumor-initiating cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2012, 109:18707-18712.
22. Flanagan L.A., et al. Unique dielectric properties distinguish stem cells and their differentiated progeny. Stem Cells 2008, 26:656-665.
23. Wang X., et al. Enhanced cell sorting and manipulation with combined optical tweezer and microfluidic chip technologies. Lab Chip 2011, 11:3656-3662.
24. Agarwal P., et al. One-step microfluidic generation of pre-hatching embryo-like core-shell microcapsules for miniaturized 3D culture of pluripotent stem cells. Lab Chip 2013, 13:4525-4533.
25. Zeng Y., et al. High-performance single cell genetic analysis using microfluidic emulsion generator arrays. Anal. Chem. 2010, 82:3183-3190.
26. Reichen M., et al. Development of a multiplexed microfluidic platform for the automated cultivation of embryonic stem cells. J. Lab. Autom. 2013, 18:519-529.
27. Kamei K.I., et al. An integrated microfluidic culture device for quantitative analysis of human embryonic stem cells. Lab Chip 2009, 9:555-563.
28. Hattori K., et al. Microenvironment array chip for cell culture environment screening. Lab Chip 2011, 11:212-214.
29. Xu B-Y., et al. A novel microfluidic platform with stable concentration gradient for on chip cell culture and screening assays. Lab Chip 2013, 13:3714-3720.
30. Kim C., et al. Diffusion- and convection-based activation of Wnt/β-catenin signaling in a gradient generating microfluidic chip. Lab Chip 2012, 12:5186-5194.
31. Cimetta E., et al. Microfluidic device generating stable concentration gradients for long term cell culture: application to Wnt3a regulation of β-catenin signaling. Lab Chip 2010, 10:3277-3283.
32. Xu H., Heilshorn S.C. Microfluidic investigation of BDNF-enhanced neural stem cell chemotaxis in CXCL12 gradients. Small 2013, 9:585-595.
33. Wu H-W., et al. Stem cells in microfluidics. Biomicrofluidics 2011, 5:013401.
34. Jeon K.J., et al. Combined effects of flow-induced shear stress and micropatterned surface morphology on neuronal differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2014, 117:242-247.
35. Balciunas E., et al. Lithographic microfabrication of biocompatible polymers for tissue engineering and lab-on-a-chip applications. Proc. SPIE 8427, Biophotonics: Photonic Solutions for Better Health Care III, 84271X 2012, 10.1117/12.923042.
36. Liu Z., et al. Covalently immobilized biomolecule gradient on hydrogel surface using a gradient generating microfluidic device for a quantitative mesenchymal stem cell study. Biomicrofluidics 2012, 6:024111.
37. Gottwald E., et al. A chip-based platform for the in vitro generation of tissues in three-dimensional organization. Lab Chip 2007, 7:777-785.
38. Datta N., et al. In vitro generated extracellular matrix and fluid shear stress synergistically enhance 3D osteoblastic differentiation. PNAS 2006, 103:2488-2493.
39. Mahadik B.P., Wheeler T.D. Microfluidic generation of gradient hydrogels to modulate hematopoietic stem cell culture environment. Adv. Healthcare Mater. 2013, 3:449-458.
40. Toh Y.C., et al. A novel 3D mammalian cell perfusion-culture system in microfluidic channels. Lab Chip 2007, 7:302-309.
41. Tenstad E., et al. Extensive adipogenic and osteogenic differentiation of patterned human mesenchymal stem cells in a microfluidic device. Lab Chip 2010, 10:1401-1409.
42. Phamduy T.B., et al. Laser direct-write of single microbeads into spatially-ordered patterns. Biofabrication 2012, 4:025006.
43. Chen J.C., Jacobs C.R. Mechanically induced osteogenic lineage commitment of stem cells. Stem Cell Res. Ther. 2013, 4:107.
44. Park J.Y., et al. Simultaneous generation of chemical concentration and mechanical shear stress gradients using microfluidic osmotic flow comparable to interstitial flow. Lab Chip 2009, 9:2194-2202.
45. Simmons C.A., et al. Cyclic strain enhances matrix mineralization by adult human mesenchymal stem cells via the extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK1/2) signaling pathway. J. Biomech. 2003, 36:1087-1096.
46. McMahon L.A., et al. Regulatory effects of mechanical strain on the chondrogenic differentiation of MSCs in a collagen-GAG scaffold: experimental and computational analysis. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2008, 36:185-194.
47. Park J.S., et al. Differential effects of equiaxial and uniaxial strain on mesenchymal stem cells. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2004, 88:359-368.
48. Shojaei S., et al. Effects of mechanical and chemical stimuli on differentiation of human adipose-derived stem cells into endothelial cells. Int. J. Artif. Organs 2013, 36:663-673.
49. Huh D., et al. Reconstituting organ-level lung functions on a chip. Science 2010, 328:1662-1668.
50. Bae C.Y., et al. Mechanical stimulation of bovine embryos in a microfluidic culture platform. BioChip J. 2011, 5:106-113.
51. Zheng W., et al. A microfluidic flow-stretch chip for investigating blood vessel biomechanics. Lab Chip 2012, 12:3441-3450.
52. Magdesian M.H., et al. Atomic force microscopy reveals important differences in axonal resistance to injury. Biophys. J. 2012, 103:405-414.
53. Svennersten K., et al. Mechanical stimulation of epithelial cells using polypyrrole microactuators. Lab Chip 2011, 11:3287-3293.
54. Hausherr T.C., et al. Capillary-valve-based platform towards cell-on-chip mechanotransduction assays. Sens. Actuat. B 2013, 188:1019-1025.
55. Hui E.E., Bhatia S.N. Micromechanical control of cell-cell interactions. PNAS 2007, 104:5722-5726.
56. Stephens C.L., et al. Adult neural progenitor cells reactivate superbursting in mature neural networks. Exp. Neurol. 2012, 234:20-30.
57. Ma Z., et al. Laser-patterned stem-cell bridges in a cardiac muscle model for on-chip electrical conductivity analyses. Lab Chip 2012, 12:566-573.
58. Reitinger S., et al. Electric impedance sensing in cell-substrates for rapid and selective multipotential differentiation capacity monitoring of human mesenchymal stem cells. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2012, 34:63-69.
59. Lee H.J., et al. Surface plasmon resonance imaging measurements of antibody arrays for the multiplexed detection of low molecular weight protein biomarkers. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78:6504-6510.
60. Soshi A., et al. Magnetoresistive-based real-time cell phagocytosis monitoring. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2012, 36:116-122.
61. Shih C.J., et al. Stem cell differentiation base on acoustic wave sensor. Proc. IEEE NEMS '07 2007, 626-629.
62. Kuo Y.C., et al. Development of a surface plasmon resonance biosensor for Real-Time detection of osteogenic differentiation in live mesenchymal stem cells. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e22382.
63. Erdem A., et al. Genomagnetic assay for electrochemical detection of osteogenic differentiation in mesenchymal stem cells. Analyst 2013, 138:5424-5430.
64. Bagnaninchi P.O., Drummond N. Real-time label-free monitoring of adipose-derived stem cell differentiation with electric cell-substrate impedance sensing. PNASci 2011, 108:6462-6467.
65. Hildebrandt C., et al. Detection of the osteogenic differentiation of mesenchymal stem cells in 2D and 3D cultures by electrochemical impedance spectroscopy. J. Biotechnol. 2010, 148:83-90.
66. Alexander F.A. From cellular cultures to cellular spheroids: is impedance spectroscopy a viable tool for monitoring multicellular spheroid (MCS) drug models?. IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2013, 6:63-76.
67. Labeed F.H., et al. Biophysical characteristics reveal neural stem cell differentiation potential. PLoS ONE 2011, 6:e25458.
68. Susloparova A., et al. Impedance spectroscopy with field-effect transistor arrays for the analysis of anti-cancer drug action on individual cells. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2013, 40:50-56.
69. Cramer T., et al. Organic ultra-thin film transistors with a liquid gate for extracellular stimulation and recording of electric activity of stem cell-derived neuronal networks. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2013, 15:3897-3905.
70. Suzuki I., et al. Carbon nanotube multi-electrode array chips for noninvasive real-time measurement of dopamine, action potentials, and postsynaptic potentials. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2013, 49:270-275.
71. Nayak T.R., et al. Graphene for controlled and accelerated osteogenic differentiation of human mesenchymal stem cells. ACS Nano 2011, 5:4670-4678.
72. Tumarkin E., et al. High-throughput combinatorial cell co-culture using microfluidics. Integr. Biol. 2011, 3:653-662.
73. Torisawa Y-s., et al. Microfluidic hydrodynamic cellular patterning for systematic formation of co-culture spheroids. Integr. Biol. 2009, 1:649-654.
74. Huang H-C., et al. Enhancement of renal epithelial cell functions through microfluidic-based coculture with adipose-derived stem cells. Tissue Eng. A 2013, 19:2024-2034.
75. Chen Q., et al. Microfluidic isolation of highly pure embryonic stem cells using feeder-separated co-culture system. Sci. Rep. 2013, 3:2433.
76. Agarwal P., et al. One-step microfluidic generation of pre-hatching embryo-like core-shell microcapsules for miniaturized 3D culture of pluripotent stem cells. Lab Chip 2013, 3:4525-4533.
77. Adamo L., García-Cardeña G. Directed stem cell differentiation by fluid mechanical forces. Antiox Redox Signal. 2011, 15:1463-1473.
78. Metallo C.M., et al. The response of human embryonic stem cell-derived endothelial cells to shear stress. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2008, 100:830-837.
79. Stolberg S., McCloskey K.E. Can shear stress direct stem cell fate?. Biotechnol. Prog. 2009, 25:10-19.
80. Jian-de Dong Y-q.G., et al. Response of mesenchymal stem cells to shear stress in tissue-engineered vascular grafts. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 2009, 30:530-536.
81. Zhao F., et al. Effects of shear stress on 3-D human mesenchymal stem cell construct development in a perfusion bioreactor system: experiments and hydrodynamic modeling. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2007, 96:584-595.
82. Kreke M.R., et al. Effect of intermittent shear stress on mechanotransductive signaling and osteoblastic differentiation of bone marrow stromal cells. Tissue Eng. A 2008, 14:529-537.
83. Toh Y-C., Voldman J. Fluid shear stress primes mouse embryonic stem cells for differentiation in a self-renewing environment via heparan sulfate proteoglycans transduction. FASEB J. 2011, 25:1208-1217.
84. Wissenwasser J., et al. Multifrequency impedance measurement technique for wireless characterization of microbiological cell cultures. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 2011, 82:115110.