ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
3D Printed Microfluidic Device with Integrated Biosensors for Online Analysis of Subcutaneous Human Microdialysate
My Activity
  • Open Access
Article

3D Printed Microfluidic Device with Integrated Biosensors for Online Analysis of Subcutaneous Human Microdialysate
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

View Author Information
Department of Bioengineering and The Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United Kingdom
§ School of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
Open PDFSupporting Information (3)

Analytical Chemistry

Cite this: Anal. Chem. 2015, 87, 15, 7763–7770
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b01353
Published June 12, 2015

Copyright © 2015 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY.

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This work presents the design, fabrication, and characterization of a robust 3D printed microfluidic analysis system that integrates with FDA-approved clinical microdialysis probes for continuous monitoring of human tissue metabolite levels. The microfluidic device incorporates removable needle type integrated biosensors for glucose and lactate, which are optimized for high tissue concentrations, housed in novel 3D printed electrode holders. A soft compressible 3D printed elastomer at the base of the holder ensures a good seal with the microfluidic chip. Optimization of the channel size significantly improves the response time of the sensor. As a proof-of-concept study, our microfluidic device was coupled to lab-built wireless potentiostats and used to monitor real-time subcutaneous glucose and lactate levels in cyclists undergoing a training regime.

Copyright © 2015 American Chemical Society

Wearable sensors connected to body sensor networks (BSN) (1) that provide real-time information about the wearer’s health and fitness (2) are of great interest both academically and commercially. Developments of such platforms have mainly focused on sensors that measure physical vital signs (e.g. pulse rate, ECG). Biosensors targeting physiologically relevant analytes are more challenging but can provide important information about tissue health (3) and fitness, (4, 5) allowing, for example, athletes to tailor their training to their individual characteristics, enabling them to assess their training effectiveness, to make adjustments, and to track improvements in their performance.
Extensive research efforts have focused on the development of miniaturized on-body chemo/biosensors for the measurement of physiological analytes in different bodily fluids, such as interstitial fluid, (6, 7) sweat, (8, 9) tears, (10, 11) and saliva. (12, 13) Glucose and lactate are particularly attractive biomarkers to monitor as they provide information about tissue energy metabolism. Lactate, in particular, has received much interest for sports monitoring. During intense exercise, tissue oxygen levels are insufficient for aerobic metabolism to meet the energy demands of the body. Instead, anaerobic metabolism occurs to meet these increased energy demands, leading to elevated lactate levels. Lactate can therefore be used as a measure of how hard the body is working, allowing athletes to modulate their effort accordingly, in order to train the body to increase its efficiency in clearing excess lactate or to avoid causing damage by overtraining.
Commercially available blood lactate and glucose meters are used for sports applications. (14) Although blood measurements provide important information about global metabolite levels in the body, the use of finger-prick test strips has several limitations. The main limitation of discrete sampling is the lack of temporal resolution, with the result that it is not possible to observe dynamic changes in metabolite levels. In order to improve temporal resolution blood samples have to be taken regularly, resulting in constant interruptions during the activity period. In contrast, online microdialysis allows continuous monitoring of tissue metabolites, which, when coupled with an online analysis system, provides good temporal resolution, suitable for resolving dynamic changes. (15-17) The microdialysis probe consists of a semipermeable membrane that is perfused with a solution that matches the extracellular fluid. Formation of a concentration gradient across the membrane allows exchange of molecules between the probe and the tissue, creating a dialysate stream that can be analyzed for compounds of interest. Microdialysis has been used in a wide range of applications and is an attractive technology for human in vivo monitoring, as commercial FDA-approved probes are available. Microdialysis combined with online analysis systems has been used extensively to detect tissue health and ischemic events. (18-21) In particular, the lactate/glucose ratio has been shown to be an especially sensitive marker of tissue health, providing a clear indication as to whether tissue energy demands are being met. (16, 19, 22)
There is a natural synergy between microdialysis and microfluidic devices because high time resolution analysis of low volume flow rates requires very small internal volumes. (17, 20, 23) Conventionally, microfluidic devices have been made using methods such as PDMS-based soft lithography due to their ease of fabrication. PDMS chips have been used extensively for proof-of-concept analysis devices for mass spectrometry, (24) as well as for optical (23, 25) and electrochemical detection. (20, 26, 27) In all cases the analyzer is a large device placed on a bench near the experimental subject. In our current PDMS-needle biosensor system this requires >1 m of connection tubing between the probe and the PDMS chip, leading to a 25 min delay before analysis at 1 μL/min flow rate, as well as a broadened temporal response due to Taylor dispersion. (28) Furthermore, our current method for manually positioning the needle electrode biosensors inside the PDMS chamber is impractical for a wearable device as movement caused by exercise leads to repositioning of the biosensor inside the microfluidic channel leading to noise and decreased sensitivity. (27)
Fast responding wearable devices need to be small and robust and placed close to the microdialysis probe outlet. (29) For reliability, they require a robust low-volume connection to the probe and should ideally incorporate biosensors as easily replaceable modules, given the possibility of biosensor failure during high-value monitoring of athletes.
Recently, there has been great interest in the use of 3D printing for the fabrication of microfluidic devices. (30-34) This rapid prototyping methodology is particularly attractive as it enables one-step fabrication of a microfluidic platform. (35) It also enables dimensional control of the device, so that it can be integrated with commercially available components. (30) The versatility of this fabrication method allows for a flexible, modular-approach to device design with each part designed to meet exact requirements. It also allows for design modifications to be made quickly and easily so that device features can be adjusted iteratively, and their influence on the device performance can be evaluated. (30, 35) Erkal et al. recently reported on the fabrication of 3D printed microfluidic devices with integrated electrodes for electrochemical detection. (30) These devices were fabricated using commercial flangeless fitting nuts to house the electrodes, which integrated with microfabricated receiving ports.
Here, we show for the first time, the development of a 3D printed microfluidic device that integrates with FDA-approved clinical microdialysis probes and incorporates needle type biosensors and which can be used for continuous monitoring of human tissue metabolite levels. As a proof-of-concept, the device is employed for online monitoring of lactate and glucose tissue levels during cycling trials, providing a robust and reliable platform with potential use for wearable sensing technologies.

Experimental Section

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Reagents

Glucose oxidase (GOx) from Aspergillus niger and lactate oxidase (LOx) from Aerococcus viridians were purchased from Sekisui Diagnostics. Polyurethane (Texin 985) was obtained from Bayer. Other reagents were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich.

Electrode Fabrication

The biosensors used in this work are based on combined needle electrodes. (20, 36) Briefly, a 50 μm diameter polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) insulated platinum/iridium (90%:10%) wire (Advent Research Materials, UK) and a 50 μm polyester insulated silver wire were threaded through a 27G hypodermic needle. The insulation layer was removed from the ends of the wires using a small flame, to expose the metal. The ends of the two wires were each connected to an electrical wire using conductive silver epoxy glue (RS Components, UK). Epoxy resin (Robnor resins, CY1301 and HY1300) was used to fill the needle and to secure the wires in place. Once the epoxy resin was cured, the sharp tip of the needle was abraded using sandpaper (Buehler, UK), to just above the bevel of the needle, to create silver and platinum disc electrodes. The blunt needle was then polished sequentially with alumina slurries (1, 0.3, and 0.05 μm). Finally, in order to create the Ag|AgCl reference electrode, the tip of the needle was dipped into a potassium dichromate reference solution (BASi, US) for 3 s, and then into a solution of diluted 37% hydrochloric acid for 20 s, to remove the oxide layer from the working and auxiliary electrodes. Cyclic voltammetry was used to assess the working electrode surface.

Biosensor Fabrication

All biosensors were controlled using in-house potentiostats and a PowerLab 8/35, controlled by LabChart Pro (ADInstruments). Glucose and lactate biosensors were fabricated in several layers, as shown in Figure 1-B. Layer i: The working electrode was first coated with poly m-phenylenediamine (m-PD) using electropolymerization, to screen out potential interferences. Briefly, the combined needle electrode was placed in a 100 mM solution of m-phenylenediamine in 0.01 M PBS at pH 7.4. The potential was held at 0 V for 20 s, 0.7 V for 20 min for electropolymerization to occur, and then 0 V for 5 min. The electrode was gently rinsed with deionized water, and cyclic voltammetry was used to verify that the working electrode had been successfully coated. Layer ii: After successful electropolymerization of the screening layer, the electrodes were dipped into the enzyme solution (60 mg/mL LOx or GOx, 30 mg/mL bovine serum albumin, 60 mg/mL poly(ethylene glycol) diglycidyl ether, and 2% v/v glycerol in 0.01 M PBS, adapted from the method described by Vasylieva et al. (37, 38)). The needles were placed in an oven at 55 °C for 2 h. Layer iii: Following enzyme immobilization, biosensors were also coated with a polyurethane film in order to extend their dynamic range to include the higher lactate levels possible in exercising tissue and to minimize the effect of any flow variations, which could occur in a flow-cell, on biosensor response.

Fabrication of Microfluidic Platform

Two different 3D printers were used for printing of the microfluidic platform. The microfluidic chip was fabricated using a 3D printer ULTRA 3SP. This machine provides 100 μm resolution in the X- and Y-axis and between 25 and 100 μm resolution in the Z-axis, depending on the parameters set. However, the true resolution of the printer is given by the voxel dimension and the material employed during fabrication. Throughout the development of this work, the “ABS 3SP White” resist was used for printing of the microfluidic chip. ABS 3SP White allows printing of dimensionally and mechanically stable components, although due to shrinkage of the resist in the printing process smaller dimensions than those specified in the design of the microfluidic channel were observed. In general, a tolerance of about 100 μm needs to be considered during the design of the components. The microfluidic platform was designed with an L-shape, in which the inner microfluidic channel incorporates a 90° bend (Figure S1-A). As the microfluidic chip needs to integrate two separate needle biosensors, one for glucose and the other for lactate sensing, it was decided to insert the two needles into the microfluidic channel through two round openings printed on the top wall of the microchannel (Figure S1-C). This configuration ensures a tidy and compact packaging of the overall platform, as shown in Figure 1-j. However, it limits the minimum microchannel width that is achievable, as it has to fit the 27G needle (Ø = ca. 413 μm) biosensors. Three different sizes of microfluidic channels were printed and tested, which had different height and width dimensions, these were as follows: (1) 520 × 520 μm, (2) 750 × 550 μm, and (3) 1000 × 550 μm. Moreover, taking into account the material shrinkage, for channel (1) two slightly wider microfluidic chambers were designed at the two needle biosensor insertion locations (Figure S1-B) to avoid issues during placement of the biosensors.
Printing of the needle holders was performed using the Objet260 Connex 3D printer. The main advantage of using this printer compared to the ULTRA 3SP is the possibility to print rigid and soft material simultaneously on the same component. For instance, VeroWhitePlus (RGD835) and TangoBlack (FLX973) were employed for the printing of the rigid and soft parts, respectively. To fix the position of the needle biosensor inside the holder two grub screws M2.5 were also used. The rubbery part of the holder has a truncated cone shape to guarantee fluidic sealing and to avoid incorrect positioning of the biosensors inside the microfluidic channel. In fact, initial attempts using a cylindrical shape rubber part lead to incorrect mounting of the biosensor holder into the microfluidic chip due to XY expansion of the rubber when compressed.

Calibration and Characterization Studies

Glucose and lactate biosensors were both held at a constant potential of +0.7 V vs Ag|AgCl. The biosensors were calibrated inside the microfluidic chip using a calibration board, consisting of two LabSmith 20 μL programmable syringe pumps, one containing T1 perfusion solution and one containing a glucose/lactate standard. By mixing the flows, a multipoint calibration was carried out by varying the relative flow rates of the two pumps, while keeping the overall flow rate constant at 1 μL/min. This system was also used to measure the time response of the biosensors in the microfluidic chip, by switching between the two solutions and measuring the time taken for the sensors to reach a steady current. In vitro microdialysis experiments were conducted using an expired microdialysis probe (CMA70, MDialysis, 10 mm membrane length, 20 kDa molecular-weight cutoff), perfused with T1 solution (2.3 mM calcium chloride, 147 mM sodium chloride, and 4 mM potassium chloride) at 1 μL/min using a microdialysis pump (CMA107, MDialysis).

Cycling Protocol

For in vivo microdialysis experiments, all procedures were approved by the local ethics committee (NRES 10/H0808/124, protocol CRO1608), and probes were inserted percutaneously by a qualified clinician. The skin was cleaned with alcohol wipes, and an anesthetic cream (EMLA, APP Pharmaceuticals) was applied to the skin 45 min prior to probe insertion. An ice pack was also placed on the skin 5 min before probe insertion, to further numb the area. A sterile CMA63 microdialysis probe (Mdialysis, 10 mm membrane length, 20 kDa molecular-weight cutoff) was inserted subcutaneously, using the tunnelling needle and introducer supplied, and secured in place with 3M single coated conformable incise medical tape. The probe was perfused with sterile T1 perfusion solution (MDialysis) at 1 μL/min using a microdialysis pump (CMA107, MDialysis). Prior to beginning exercise, baseline dialysate levels of glucose and lactate were measured. The cycling protocol consisted of 3 levels of increasing intensity, followed by a 1 min sprint, and finally a warm-down phase, as shown in Figure 4-A. Dialysate glucose and lactate levels were also recorded during the recovery phase immediately after exercise.
Cycling trials were performed using a Wattbike (Wattbike, UK), that allows recording of pedal cadence (rpm) and heart rate using a wireless chest belt (Sunto dual chest belt). Data was despiked, (39) and the time delay between the microdialysis probe and the analysis system removed. Current measurements were converted into concentration values using pre-experiment calibrations.

Results and Discussion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

3D Printed Microfluidic Device

The design of the 3D printed microfluidic device was driven by the need to make a reliable and simple connection between the microfluidic chip and the commercially available microdialysis probe through the use of the probe outlet holder (Figure 1-C item c). This simplifies the overall device architecture, as no extra connection tubing and adaptors are needed, additionally decreasing the overall dead volume of the system.
The design of the microfluidic device was inspired by the configuration used in the standard microdialysis setup (Figure 1-A), in which the microfluidic device slots into the probe outlet holder and replaces the microvial, as shown in Figure 1-D. To achieve this, the microfluidic chip (Figure 1-C item e) was designed and printed with a unique L-shape, the vertical arm for connection purposes and the horizontal arm for integration of the two needle biosensors. The vertical arm of the chip presents similar geometry to the microvial. For instance, the microfluidic inlet port was printed to incorporate the rubber insert (Figure 1-C item d) from the microvial, so as to take advantage of the easy and leak-free connection port. Moreover, this design offers flexibility for the device to be used in a diverse range of microdialysis applications, as it can be used with all clinical microdialysis probes, since they have the same type of outlet holder.
With regard to the horizontal section of the microfluidic device, a major challenge was to incorporate and secure the biosensors in the correct position inside the microfluidic channel, preventing any leaks. Initially, attempts were made to achieve this by threading the needle electrode through a commercially available 1/32″ one-piece fitting (2-56 UNC) and using this to secure the electrode in place inside the microfluidic chip. (30) Using this approach, the device dimensions were determined by the size of the fittings and as such were relatively large (over 1 mm). However, integrating the biosensor in this way did not provide a good seal with the microfluidic chip, causing leaks to occur. Erkal et al. showed that electrodes could be successfully integrated with 3D printed microfluidic devices using commercially available fittings; however, due to the small size of our sensor, a 1/32″ fitting was required. These threads were too small (2-56 UNC) to be printed and a thread tapping tool (M2.5) was used instead. Unfortunately this approach did not provide a satisfactory seal or good reproducibility. To overcome the issue of the previous method, custom-made electrode holders (Figure 1-C parts g and h) were also designed and 3D printed, which allow better control over the electrode placement inside the microfluidic channel.
The electrode holder was printed using the Objet260 Connex 3D printer, capable of printing both hard and soft plastics simultaneously on the same component. This enabled the bottom part of the holder to be printed using a soft and compressible plastic, ensuring a good seal between the holder and the microfluidic device, preventing potential leaks. The holders were designed so that the needle tip protruded from the end and the needle was secured in place using two grub screws. The needle position inside the holder could be varied depending on the length of the needle, as this can change after repeated polishing of the electrode (see supporting video 1).
This ensures that the needle tip is at a fixed distance from the end of the holder and hence in the correct position inside the microfluidic channel. The microfluidic platform was designed so that the holder could be guided into position; two pegs on the sides of the electrode holder inserted into guiding slots and locked into place, positioning the needle tip precisely inside the channel (see supporting video 2). Moreover, to facilitate the positioning of the electrode inside the microchannel an additional cross-sectional cut-out of the microfluidic device was printed. Using the cut-out component it was possible to visualize the electrode inside the channel under a microscope and to precisely secure the sensors inside the holders so that the tip of the biosensor was at the desired height inside the microchannel (Figure S2).
The use of 3D printing for fabrication of the device enabled a modular approach to be adopted, designing separate parts to be integrated together. Using this method each part of the device could be designed and optimized iteratively to meet its own individual requirements.

Figure 1

Figure 1. A. Standard microdialysis setup for discrete sampling. The probe (a) is perfused at a fixed low flow rate, and dialysate is collected into a microvial (b) at the probe outlet. Right: shows the microvial when connected to the probe outlet holder. B. Photograph of combined needle electrode based on a 27G hypodermic needle and schematic cross-section of the needle tip, showing the layers that make up the biosensor: (i) m-PD exclusion layer, (ii) substrate oxidase (SOx) entrapped in a hydrogel, and (iii) diffusion limiting polyurethane outer film. C. Exploded view of custom-made microfluidic device for continuous monitoring of dialysate, showing the multicomponent system. The microfluidic chip (e) connects to the probe outlet holder (c) in place of a microvial. The outlet holder needle enters the microvial rubber insert (d) at the inlet of the microfluidic chip. Glucose and lactate needle biosensors (f) are housed in custom-made electrode holders (g) that screw into the microfluidic chip, placing the biosensors in the middle of the microfluidic channel and providing a good seal between the holder and the microfluidic device. (h) shows a photograph of an electrode holder containing a needle biosensor. The black part at the base of the holder is made of soft, compressible plastic to ensure the holder makes a good seal with the microfluidic chip. D. The L-shaped design provides a tidy and compact overall system.

Biosensor Characterization Inside 3D Printed Microfluidic Chip

To investigate the effect of the microfluidic channel dimensions on the response time of the sensors, three different channel sizes were tested, as described in the Experimental Section. Figure 2-B shows the normalized current response of a glucose biosensor to a step change from 0 to 2 mM at 1 μL/min for the different channel sizes. In each case the sensor was positioned in the middle of the channel. Cross sections of each channel were measured using a microscope to determine the actual dimensions of each of the channels. The dimensions specified in the table in Figure 2-B refer to the measured dimensions.
Both glucose and lactate biosensors without the polyurethane (PU) outer film are fast responding (for a step change in well-stirred beaker T90 glucose = 6.6 ± 3.9 s (n = 24), lactate = 5.1 ± 2.6 s (n = 30), data not shown). Addition of the PU film to extend the dynamic range (necessary for lactate biosensor) slows both sensors (as shown in Figure 2-A) and increases the variability in response as the PU thickness is difficult to control (for a step change T90 glucose = 36.1 ± 19.6 s (n = 5), lactate = 22.8 ± 11.3 s (n = 21)). The same biosensor shows good reproducibility. For example, the sensors in Figure 2-A have T90 glucose = 21.0 ± 0.6 s (n = 3) and lactate = 26.1 ± 1.4 s (n = 3). Laminar flow inside the connection tubing and microfluidic channel leads to broadening of the concentration change, due to Taylor dispersion. (28) In Figure 2-B we show that the time response of the sensor to a step change is reduced by decreasing the channel cross-sectional area. The T90 values are summarized in Table 1 and are generally inversely proportional to cross-sectional area and hence proportional to linear flow rate. In the channel, glucose values are longer than lactate ones because the glucose biosensor was second in line and hence exposed to a greater channel volume. The fastest response time was observed in channel 1; therefore, these dimensions were chosen for the final device.
The horizontal section of the microfluidic chip is similar to the microfluidic device described by Erkal et al., which had an internal volume of 3.90 μL. Our microfluidic chip is broadly similar, but the internal volume up until the first biosensor is approximately 1.91 μL based on measured dimensions.
Metabolite levels in tissue vary between people and depend on a person’s metabolism and fitness during exercise, as well as on the particular tissue being sampled. (40) The system was calibrated online from 0 to 10 mM, at 1 μL/min to verify that it is capable of detecting physiologically relevant concentrations of glucose and lactate levels in the dialysate. Figure 3 shows typical current response vs concentration for the biosensors when placed in the microfluidic device. These data indicate that the biosensing system has good sensitivity to glucose and lactate, with clear current changes corresponding to increasing levels of substrate. The biosensors show a good dynamic range, suitable for physiological monitoring. The fact that sensitivities are similar for the glucose and lactate sensors (Figure 3) reflects the mass-transport limiting effects of the PU membrane.
As a further validation test, it was important to test the microfluidic device with a microdialysis probe in vitro. To mimic changes occurring in the tissue, the microdialysis probe was placed in a well-stirred beaker and subjected to changes in beaker lactate and glucose concentrations. The outlet holder of the microdialysis probe was connected to the microfluidic device, which continuously measured the glucose and lactate levels of the dialysate.

Figure 2

Figure 2. A. Normalized current response of a 50 μm disc glucose (red) and lactate (green) biosensor in a stirred beaker to a 2 mM concentration step (purple arrow). B. The graph shows the normalized current for a glucose biosensor to a step change from 0 to 2 mM at 1 μL/min in three different microfluidic channels. The measured channel sizes are shown in the table inset. The response time increases as the channel dimension increases.

Table 1. Effect of Channel Size on Response Time
channel dimensions H × W (μm)glucose T90 (s)lactate T90 (s)
375 × 508208 ± 6.5194 ± 15
410 × 615267 ± 7.7227 ± 7.0
421 × 971398 ± 12.8286 ± 6.9
As the biosensors are placed consecutively in the microfluidic chip, there is a 2 min delay between the lactate and glucose responses to the dialysate changes. There is also an additional delay to take into account between the changes occurring at the probe membrane and the analysis system due to the length of outlet tubing. Taking both factors into consideration, the total delay was found to be 13 min for the lactate biosensor, which was placed first in the direction of flow and 15 min for the glucose biosensor, which was placed second in the direction of flow. This delay is largely caused by the commercially available probe outlet tubing and, therefore, could be reduced further still if the extension on the probe outlet was shortened. Nevertheless, the delay time of the microfluidic device described here was substantially improved compared to our PDMS-based microfluidic device, which had a lag time of 25 min using the same flow rate (1 μL/min).

Online Subcutaneous Glucose and Lactate Measurement during Cycling Trials

In a proof-of-concept study to demonstrate the potential of this device for continuous monitoring applications the 3D printed microfluidic chip, housing glucose and lactate needle biosensors, was tested as a wearable device for online measurement of subcutaneous metabolite levels during cycling training in two cyclists.
Following probe insertion, the microfluidic device was connected to the probe outlet holder and secured to the lower back, as shown in Figure 4-A. The biosensors were connected to an in-house wireless potentiostat, housed inside a saddlebag attached to the bike seat. The wireless potentiostat used was relatively large (10.5 × 6.0 × 5.0 cm L × W × H) compared to the microfluidic device and is not yet small enough to be integrated into a fully wearable system. Current research within our groups is aimed at miniaturization of this device.

Figure 3

Figure 3. Typical calibration curves for 50 μm disc glucose and lactate biosensors in the microfluidic device at 1 μL/min. Mean ± standard deviation of measurement shown (n = 4). Points fitted with the Michaelis–Menten equation. Inset: Raw data for a typical 5-point lactate calibration from 0 to 4 mM in 1 mM steps.

A schematic of the cycling protocol is shown in Figure 4-B. Baseline glucose and lactate levels were measured in the dialysate, following probe insertion, prior to exercise. The exercise phase consisted of three levels of increasing intensity, followed by a short sprint and a period of warming down. Finally, dialysate glucose and lactate levels were monitored during the recovery period following exercise.
Initial levels after probe insertion were variable due to the trauma of insertion. Therefore, baseline levels were monitored for at least 30 min to allow time for the tissue to stabilize following probe insertion; typically this occurred 12 min after insertion. (21)
Results obtained from one of the cyclists during the exercise phase of the cycling protocol are presented in Figure 4-C, together with data recorded using the exercise bicycle, showing heart rate and rotations per minute (rpm), to quantify the exercise intensity. Initially, during phases ii and iii the heart rate signal was noisy as there was insufficient sweat to ensure good contact between the skin and the wireless chest belt electrodes. Prior to starting exercise, baseline glucose and lactate levels in the dialysate were 6.02 ± 1.08 mM and 1.81 ± 0.33 mM, respectively (mean ± standard deviation over 30 s time period). Measured subcutaneous glucose levels decreased with increasing exercise intensity, and local levels were driven down further still following exercise, even after 50 min of rest. In contrast, lactate levels increased with increasing exercise intensity, peaking immediately after the sprint, and gradually decreased once cycling had stopped. After 50 min of resting, dialysate glucose and lactate levels were 1.84 ± 0.05 mM and 1.67 ± 0.03 mM, respectively.
To guard against possible changes in probe recovery, a ratio of the two metabolites was also calculated. The lactate/glucose ratio increased with exercise and rose more steeply with increasing cycling intensity. Interestingly, the lactate/glucose ratio continued to increase considerably, even after exercise had stopped.
An overview of the dialysate glucose and lactate levels and the lactate/glucose ratio throughout the cycling protocol for two cyclists is shown in Figure 4-D. The overall trends in glucose and lactate levels are similar for the two cyclists, although the absolute concentrations appear quite different. This variability could be caused by changes in probe recovery or by differences in the fitness levels of the cyclists. In principle, level changes caused by differences in probe recovery would have been removed using ratios of analyte concentrations, such as the lactate/glucose ratio. (16) Such ratios are widely used for monitoring in the injured human brain (lactate/pyruvate) (41) and in muscle (lactate/pyruvate and lactate/glucose), (42) though this needs to be further investigated for subcutaneous tissue. Nevertheless, there are clear differences in the lactate/glucose ratio trend for the two cyclists.

Conclusion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

We have demonstrated the first example of a 3D printed microfluidic device with integrated removable biosensors that joins directly to a clinical microdialysis probe for continuous human monitoring applications. Here we have demonstrated its capabilities as a wearable device for subcutaneous monitoring of tissue glucose and lactate levels in cyclists during exercise. The clear changes recorded in the local glucose and lactate levels indicate that this device could have huge potential for monitoring and evaluating athlete training effectiveness in real-time. Moreover, this miniaturized device also has potential for clinical microdialysis applications, such as bedside monitoring, as its wearable nature removes the need for long connection tubing, which usually leads to long lag times. Due to the dimensional control provided by 3D printing, it was possible to design the microfluidic device so that it could easily be integrated with commercially available microdialysis probes, making it suitable for numerous potential applications. Future work will focus on miniaturization of the wireless potentiostats to enable integration of the electronics within the wearable device. Due to the modular nature of the device, the platform can be expanded to include monitoring of other clinically relevant biomarkers, offering promise in a wide range of clinical and fitness applications.

Figure 4

Figure 4. A. Photograph of microfluidic device to measure tissue glucose and lactate levels in dialysate during the cycling protocol. Dialysate flowed into the microfluidic chip, housing the glucose and lactate biosensors, which were connected to wireless potentiostats, secured onto the bike. B. Experimental protocol. Tissue levels were monitored during an initial resting period (i), followed by cycling at 4 levels of increasing rpm (ii-v), a level of warming down (vi), and a final period of resting (vii). C. Dialysate glucose and lactate levels during the exercise phase of the cycling protocol. The bottom graph shows the glucose (red) and lactate (green) levels, the middle graph (black) shows the lactate/glucose ratio, and the top graph shows the rotations per minute (blue) and heart rate (purple) throughout the cycling protocol. Glucose and lactate traces have been despiked. (39) The dotted lines indicate the stages of varying cycling intensity: (ii) 55 rpm, (iii) 65 rpm, (iv) 75 rpm, (v) sprint, and (vi) 55 rpm. Data has been time-aligned, taking into account the time delay of the system. D. Histograms showing mean dialysate levels for two different cyclists during key points in cycling protocol. Labels correspond to stages described in the experimental protocol: (i) baseline (ii) midway through warm up, (iii) midway through medium intensity, (iv) midway through high intensity, (v) end of sprint, (vi) end of warm down, and (vii) after 50 min of recovery.

Supporting Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Additional information as noted in text (Figures S1–S3 and supporting videos 1 and 2). The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b01353. Data supporting this publication can be obtained on request from [email protected].

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Author
    • Martyn G. Boutelle - †Department of Bioengineering and ‡The Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United KingdomSchool of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Sally A. N. Gowers - †Department of Bioengineering and ‡The Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United KingdomSchool of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
    • Vincenzo F. Curto - †Department of Bioengineering and ‡The Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United KingdomSchool of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
    • Carlo A. Seneci - †Department of Bioengineering and ‡The Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United KingdomSchool of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
    • Chu Wang - †Department of Bioengineering and ‡The Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United KingdomSchool of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
    • Salzitsa Anastasova - School of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
    • Pankaj Vadgama - School of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
    • Guang-Zhong Yang - †Department of Bioengineering and ‡The Hamlyn Centre, Imperial College London, London SW7 2AZ, United KingdomSchool of Engineering and Materials Science, Queen Mary, University of London, Mile End Road, London E1 4NS, United Kingdom
  • Author Contributions

    S.G. and V.F.C. contributed equally to this work.

  • Notes
    The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Acknowledgment

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

We thank the EPSRC (EP/H009744/1) and Wellcome Trust DOH (HICF-0510-080) for funding. We would like to thank Mr. Vassilios Kontojannis and Mr. Hani Marcus for their expertise in carrying out the microdialysis probe insertion. We are grateful to 3M for supplying the single coated conformable incise medical tape.

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 42 other publications.

  1. 1
    Body Sensor Networks; Yang, G.-Z., Ed.; Springer: 2014.
  2. 2
    Matzeu, G.; Florea, L.; Diamond, D. Sens. Actuators, B 2015, 211, 403 418
  3. 3
    Rogers, M. L.; Boutelle, M. G. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2013, 6, 427 453
  4. 4
    Diamond, D.; Coyle, S.; Scarmagnani, S.; Hayes, J. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 652 679
  5. 5
    Windmiller, J. R.; Wang, J. Electroanalysis 2013, 25, 29 46
  6. 6
    Woderer, S.; Henninger, N.; Garthe, C. D.; Kloetzer, H. M.; Hajnsek, M.; Kamecke, U.; Gretz, N.; Kraenzlin, B.; Pill, J. Anal. Chim. Acta 2007, 581, 7 12
  7. 7
    Facchinetti, A.; Sparacino, G.; Cobelli, C. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 2007, 1, 617 623
  8. 8
    Curto, V. F.; Fay, C.; Coyle, S.; Byrne, R.; O’Toole, C.; Barry, C.; Hughes, S.; Moyna, N.; Diamond, D.; Benito-Lopez, F. Sens. Actuators, B Chem. 2012, 171–172, 1327 1334
  9. 9
    Jia, W.; Bandodkar, A. J.; Valde, G.; Windmiller, J. R.; Yang, Z.; Ram, J.; Chan, G.; Wang, J. Anal. Chem. 2013, 85, 6553 6560
  10. 10
    Kabilan, S.; Ph, D.; Lowe, C. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 2006, 8, 89 93
  11. 11
    Iguchi, S.; Kudo, H.; Saito, T.; Ogawa, M.; Saito, H.; Otsuka, K.; Funakubo, A.; Mitsubayashi, K. Biomed. Microdevices 2007, 9, 603 609
  12. 12
    Yoda, K.; Shimazaki, K.; Ueda, Y.; Ann, N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1998, 864, 600 604
  13. 13
    Mannoor, M. S.; Tao, H.; Clayton, J. D.; Sengupta, A.; Kaplan, D. L.; Naik, R. R.; Verma, N.; Omenetto, F. G.; McAlpine, M. C. Graphene-based wireless bacteria detection on tooth enamel Nat. Commun. 2012, 3, 763
  14. 14
    Krustrup, P.; Mohr, M.; Steensberg, A.; Bencke, J.; Kjaer, M.; Bangsbo, J. Med. Sci. Sports Exercise 2006, 38, 1165 1174
  15. 15
    Watson, C. J.; Venton, B. J.; Kennedy, R. T. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78, 1391 1399
  16. 16
    Parkin, M. C.; Hopwood, S. E.; Boutelle, M. G.; Strong, A. J. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem. 2003, 22, 487 497
  17. 17
    Schultz, K. N.; Kennedy, R. T. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2008, 1, 627 661
  18. 18
    Nandi, P.; Lunte, S. M. Anal. Chim. Acta 2009, 651, 1 14
  19. 19
    Rogers, M. L.; Brennan, P. A.; Leong, C. L.; Gowers, S. A. N.; Aldridge, T.; Mellor, T. K.; Boutelle, M. G. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2013, 405, 3881 3888
  20. 20
    Rogers, M. L.; Feuerstein, D.; Leong, C. L.; Takagaki, M.; Niu, X.; Graf, R.; Boutelle, M. G. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2013, 4, 799 807
  21. 21
    Deeba, S.; Corcoles, E. P.; Hanna, G. B.; Hanna, B. G.; Pareskevas, P.; Aziz, O.; Boutelle, M. G.; Darzi, A. Dis. Colon Rectum 2008, 51, 1408 1413
  22. 22
    Birke-Sorensen, H. J. Transplant. 2012, 2012, 970630
  23. 23
    Wang, M.; Roman, G. T.; Schultz, K.; Jennings, C.; Kennedy, R. T. Anal. Chem. 2008, 80, 5607 5615
  24. 24
    Sun, S.; Slaney, T. R.; Kennedy, R. T. Anal. Chem. 2012, 84, 5794 5800
  25. 25
    Nandi, P.; Desai, D. P.; Lunte, S. M. Electrophoresis 2010, 31, 1414 1422
  26. 26
    Lucca, B. G.; Lunte, S. M.; Tomazelli Coltro, W. K.; Ferreira, V. S. Electrophoresis 2014, 35, 3363 3370
  27. 27
    Rogers, M.; Leong, C.; Niu, X.; de Mello, A.; Parker, K. H.; Boutelle, M. G. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2011, 13, 5298 5303
  28. 28
    Taylor, G. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 1953, 219, 186 203
  29. 29
    Lunte, S. M.; Nandi, P.; Regel, A.; Grigsby, R.; Hulvey, M. K.; Scott, D.; Naylor, E.; Gabbert, S.; Johnson, D. In 14th International Conference on Miniaturized Systems for Chemistry and Life Sciences; 2010; pp 1535 1537.
  30. 30
    Erkal, J. L.; Selimovic, A.; Gross, B. C.; Lockwood, S. Y.; Walton, E. L.; McNamara, S.; Martin, R. S.; Spence, D. M. Lab Chip 2014, 14, 2023 2032
  31. 31
    Kitson, P. J.; Rosnes, M. H.; Sans, V.; Dragone, V.; Cronin, L. Lab Chip 2012, 12, 3267
  32. 32
    Therriault, D.; White, S. R.; Lewis, J. A. Nat. Mater. 2003, 2, 265 271
  33. 33
    Snowden, M. E.; King, P. H.; Covington, J. a; Macpherson, J. V.; Unwin, P. R. Anal. Chem. 2010, 82, 3124 3131
  34. 34
    Anderson, K. B.; Lockwood, S. Y.; Martin, R. S.; Spence, D. M. Anal. Chem. 2013, 85, 5622 5626
  35. 35
    Waldbaur, A.; Rapp, H.; Länge, K.; Rapp, B. E. Anal. Methods 2011, 3, 2681
  36. 36
    Patel, B. A.; Rogers, M.; Wieder, T.; O’Hare, D.; Boutelle, M. G. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2011, 26, 2890 2896
  37. 37
    Viggiano, A.; Marinesco, S.; Pain, F.; Meiller, A.; Gurden, H. J. Neurosci. Methods 2012, 206, 1 6
  38. 38
    Vasylieva, N.; Barnych, B.; Meiller, A.; Maucler, C.; Pollegioni, L.; Lin, J.-S.; Barbier, D.; Marinesco, S. Biosens. Bioelectron 2011, 26, 3993 4000
  39. 39
    Feuerstein, D.; Parker, K. H.; Boutelle, M. G. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 4987 4994
  40. 40
    Heinonen, I.; Kalliokoski, K. K.; Hannukainen, J. C.; Duncker, D. J.; Nuutila, P.; Knuuti, J. Physiology (Bethesda) 2014, 29, 421 436
  41. 41
    Timofeev, I.; Carpenter, K. L. H.; Nortje, J.; Al-Rawi, P. G.; O’Connell, M. T.; Czosnyka, M.; Smielewski, P.; Pickard, J. D.; Menon, D. K.; Kirkpatrick, P. J.; Gupta, A. K.; Hutchinson, P. J. Brain 2011, 134, 484 494
  42. 42
    Kristensen, D. L.; Ladefoged, S. A; Sloth, E.; Aagaard, R.; Birke-Sørensen, H. Br. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2013, 51, 117 122

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article is cited by 159 publications.

  1. Haoliang Lu, Almas Rakhymzhanov, Ulrich Buttner, Dana Alsulaiman. Making Healthcare Accessible: A Rapid Clean-Room-Free Fabrication Strategy for Microfluidics-Driven Biosensors Based on Coupling Stereolithography and Hot Embossing. ACS Omega 2024, 9 (36) , 38096-38106. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.4c05196
  2. De-Shaine Murray, Laure Stickel, Martyn Boutelle. Computational Modeling as a Tool to Drive the Development of a Novel, Chemical Device for Monitoring the Injured Brain and Body. ACS Chemical Neuroscience 2023, 14 (19) , 3599-3608. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.3c00063
  3. Dan Luo, Haibo Sun, Qianqian Li, Xin Niu, Yin He, Hao Liu. Flexible Sweat Sensors: From Films to Textiles. ACS Sensors 2023, 8 (2) , 465-481. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.2c02642
  4. Emily K. Gifford, Elaine M. Robbins, Andrea Jaquins-Gerstl, Michael T. Rerick, Enyinna L. Nwachuku, Stephen G. Weber, Martyn G. Boutelle, David O. Okonkwo, Ava M. Puccio, Adrian C. Michael. Validation of Dexamethasone-Enhanced Continuous-Online Microdialysis for Monitoring Glucose for 10 Days after Brain Injury. ACS Chemical Neuroscience 2021, 12 (19) , 3588-3597. https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.1c00231
  5. Yanlong Xing, Linlu Zhao, Ziyi Cheng, Chuanzhu Lv, Feifei Yu, Fabiao Yu. Microfluidics-Based Sensing of Biospecies. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2021, 4 (3) , 2160-2191. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.0c01271
  6. Isabelle C. Samper, Sally A. N. Gowers, Marsilea A. Booth, Chu Wang, Thomas Watts, Tonghathai Phairatana, Natalie Vallant, Bynvant Sandhu, Vassilios Papalois, Martyn G. Boutelle. Portable Microfluidic Biosensing System for Real-Time Analysis of Microdialysate in Transplant Kidneys. Analytical Chemistry 2019, 91 (22) , 14631-14638. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.9b03774
  7. Richard P. S. de Campos, Darius G. Rackus, Roger Shih, Chen Zhao, Xinyu Liu, Aaron R. Wheeler. “Plug-n-Play” Sensing with Digital Microfluidics. Analytical Chemistry 2019, 91 (3) , 2506-2515. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b05375
  8. Judith B. Rommel and David J. Wales . Kinetics of Molecular Diffusion and Self-Assembly: Glycine on Cu{110}. The Journal of Physical Chemistry C 2018, 122 (1) , 782-797. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpcc.7b06847
  9. Marsilea A. Booth, Sally A. N. Gowers, Chi Leng Leong, Michelle L. Rogers, Isabelle C. Samper, Aidan P. Wickham, and Martyn G. Boutelle . Chemical Monitoring in Clinical Settings: Recent Developments toward Real-Time Chemical Monitoring of Patients. Analytical Chemistry 2018, 90 (1) , 2-18. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.7b04224
  10. Samuel S. Hinman, Kristy S. McKeating, and Quan Cheng . Plasmonic Sensing with 3D Printed Optics. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89 (23) , 12626-12630. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.7b03967
  11. Robert J. Soto, Jackson R. Hall, Micah D. Brown, James B. Taylor, and Mark H. Schoenfisch . In Vivo Chemical Sensors: Role of Biocompatibility on Performance and Utility. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89 (1) , 276-299. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b04251
  12. Tongfang Xiao, Fei Wu, Jie Hao, Meining Zhang, Ping Yu, and Lanqun Mao . In Vivo Analysis with Electrochemical Sensors and Biosensors. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89 (1) , 300-313. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b04308
  13. Bethany Gross, Sarah Y. Lockwood, and Dana M. Spence . Recent Advances in Analytical Chemistry by 3D Printing. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89 (1) , 57-70. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b04344
  14. Huan Liu, Aminov Nail, Decheng Meng, Liran Zhu, Xiaohan Guo, Cong Li, Huan-Jun Li. Recent progress in the 3D printing of microneedle patches for biomedical applications. International Journal of Pharmaceutics 2025, 668 , 124995. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpharm.2024.124995
  15. Yibo Ma, Xu Zhou, Fan Zhang, Christian Weißenfels, Moubin Liu. A novel smoothed particle hydrodynamics method for multi-physics simulation of laser powder bed fusion. Computational Mechanics 2024, 74 (5) , 1009-1036. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00466-024-02465-5
  16. Major A. Selemani, Khamhbawihum Cenhrang, Samuel Azibere, Mariama Singhateh, R. Scott Martin. 3D printed microfluidic devices with electrodes for electrochemical analysis. Analytical Methods 2024, 16 (41) , 6941-6953. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4AY01701C
  17. Moses Kumi, Tengjiao Wang, Onome Ejeromedoghene, Junjie Wang, Peng Li, Wei Huang. Exploring the Potentials of Chitin and Chitosan‐Based Bioinks for 3D‐Printing of Flexible Electronics: The Future of Sustainable Bioelectronics. Small Methods 2024, 8 (9) https://doi.org/10.1002/smtd.202301341
  18. Jerome Rajendran, Rahim Esfandyarpour. Revolutionizing Personalized Health: The Frontier of Wearable Biomolecule Sensors Through 3D Printing Innovation. Biomedical Materials & Devices 2024, 5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s44174-024-00226-9
  19. Md Jarir Hossain, Bahareh Tavousi Tabatabaei, Mazen Kiki, Jae-Won Choi. Additive Manufacturing of Sensors: A Comprehensive Review. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing-Green Technology 2024, 55 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40684-024-00629-5
  20. Levent Özcan, Ahmet Fatih Yuran. ÜÇ BOYUTLU YAZICIYLA ÜRETİLMİŞ YÜZEY BASKILI ELEKTROT BENZERİ SİSTEMİN ELEKTROKİMYASAL UYGULAMASI. International Journal of 3D Printing Technologies and Digital Industry 2024, 8 (1) , 80-91. https://doi.org/10.46519/ij3dptdi.1324695
  21. Xuehui Lei, Weiwu Ye, F. Safdarin, Sh. Baghaei. Microfluidics devices for sports: A review on technology for biomedical application used in fields such as biomedicine, drug encapsulation, preparation of nanoparticles, cell targeting, analysis, diagnosis, and cell culture. Tissue and Cell 2024, 87 , 102339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tice.2024.102339
  22. Sasikala Apoorva, Nam-Trung Nguyen, Kamalalayam Rajan Sreejith. Recent developments and future perspectives of microfluidics and smart technologies in wearable devices. Lab on a Chip 2024, 24 (7) , 1833-1866. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4LC00089G
  23. Sudhir Kumar, Harpreet Singh, Inderjeet Singh, Shalok Bharti, Dinesh Kumar, G. Siebert, S.S.R. Koloor. A comprehensive review of FDM printing in sensor applications: Advancements and future perspectives. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 2024, 113 , 152-170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2024.01.030
  24. Jelva Hussan K S, Mohana Priya Subramaniam, Mohammed Kenz K T, Pranav Sreeram, Sree Parvathi, Sari PS, Abhilash Pullanchiyodan, Daniel M. Mulhivill, Prasanth Raghavan. Fabrication and challenges of 3D printed sensors for biomedical applications-Comprehensive review. Results in Engineering 2024, 21 , 101867. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rineng.2024.101867
  25. Nasir Khan, Pinaki Sengupta. Technological Advancement and Trend in Selective Bioanalytical Sample Extraction through State of the Art 3-D Printing Techniques Aiming ‘Sorbent Customization as per need’. Critical Reviews in Analytical Chemistry 2024, , 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347.2024.2305275
  26. Mayank Garg, Arpana Parihar, Md. Saifur Rahman. Advanced and personalized healthcare through integrated wearable sensors (versatile). Materials Advances 2024, 5 (2) , 432-452. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3MA00657C
  27. Appan Roychoudhury, Rishi Raj. Role of 3D printing in microfluidics and applications. 2024, 67-107. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-98805-6.00004-X
  28. Junfeng Xiao, Dongxing Zhang, Zhichao Ma, Lingyun Chen, Yong Sun, Peipei Jia, Qiuquan Guo. Vat photopolymerization 3D printing application in electronics. 2024, 365-405. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-15487-4.00012-1
  29. Sunil Mehla, PR. Selvakannan, Maciej Mazur, Suresh K. Bhargava. Aufkommende technologische Anwendungen der additiven Fertigung. 2024, 191-268. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-0978-6_7
  30. Siamak Salavatian, Elaine Marie Robbins, Yuki Kuwabara, Elisa Castagnola, Xinyan Tracy Cui, Aman Mahajan. Real-time in vivo thoracic spinal glutamate sensing during myocardial ischemia. American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology 2023, 325 (6) , H1304-H1317. https://doi.org/10.1152/ajpheart.00299.2023
  31. Beata M. Szydłowska, Zizhen Cai, Mark C. Hersam. Printed nanomaterial sensor platforms for COVID-19 and future pandemics. Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science 2023, 27 (6) , 101121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cossms.2023.101121
  32. Ji‐Woo Gu, Jae‐Hwan Lee, Seung‐Kyun Kang. 3D Electronic Sensors for Bio‐Interfaced Electronics and Soft Robotics. Advanced Sensor Research 2023, 2 (11) https://doi.org/10.1002/adsr.202300013
  33. Panagiotis Kassanos, Sally Gowers, Martyn Boutelle. Glucose and Lactate Amperometric Sensors on a Flexible Printed Circuit for Low-Cost Sensing Applications. 2023, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/SENSORS56945.2023.10325314
  34. Steffen Kurzhals, Eva Melnik, Paulina Plata, Esra Cihan, Peter Herzog, Alfons Felice, Andrea Bocchino, Conor O'Mahony, Giorgio C. Mutinati, Rainer Hainberger. Detection of Lactate via Amperometric Sensors Modified With Direct Electron Transfer Enzyme Containing PEDOT:PSS and Hydrogel Inks. IEEE Sensors Letters 2023, 7 (9) , 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/LSENS.2023.3307066
  35. Tao Yu, Jidong Zhao. Quantifying the mechanisms of keyhole pore evolutions and the role of metal-vapor condensation in laser powder bed fusion. Additive Manufacturing 2023, 72 , 103642. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2023.103642
  36. Jonas R Knudsen, Kaspar W Persson, Carlos Henriquez-Olguin, Zhencheng Li, Nicolas Di Leo, Sofie A Hesselager, Steffen H Raun, Janne R Hingst, Raphaël Trouillon, Martin Wohlwend, Jørgen FP Wojtaszewski, Martin AM Gijs, Thomas Elbenhardt Jensen. Microtubule-mediated GLUT4 trafficking is disrupted in insulin-resistant skeletal muscle. eLife 2023, 12 https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.83338
  37. Shangshang Ma, Wei Zhao, Qing Zhang, Keying Zhang, Chong Liang, Dingkai Wang, Xutang Liu, Xijie Zhan. A portable microfluidic electrochemical sensing platform for rapid detection of hazardous metal Pb2+ based on thermocapillary convection using 3D Ag-rGO-f-Ni(OH)2/NF as a signal amplifying element. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2023, 448 , 130923. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2023.130923
  38. Ruitao Su, Fujun Wang, Michael C. McAlpine. 3D printed microfluidics: advances in strategies, integration, and applications. Lab on a Chip 2023, 23 (5) , 1279-1299. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2LC01177H
  39. Azadeh Izadyari Aghmiuni, Saeed Heidari Keshel. Eye-on-a-chip. 2023, 315-369. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823536-2.00001-8
  40. Akshath Uchangi Satyaprasad. Commercialized Enzymatic Biosensors in Healthcare Against the Conventional Methods. 2023, 323-358. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-6982-1_14
  41. Chisomo Zimphango, Farah C. Alimagham, Tanya Hutter, Peter J. Hutchinson, Keri L.H. Carpenter. Quantification of pyruvate in-vitro using mid-infrared spectroscopy: Developing a system for microdialysis monitoring in traumatic brain injury patients. Brain and Spine 2023, 3 , 102686. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bas.2023.102686
  42. Christopher Heuer, John‐Alexander Preuß, Taieb Habib, Anton Enders, Janina Bahnemann. 3D printing in biotechnology—An insight into miniaturized and microfluidic systems for applications from cell culture to bioanalytics. Engineering in Life Sciences 2022, 22 (12) , 744-759. https://doi.org/10.1002/elsc.202100081
  43. Balaji Ramachandran, Ying-Chih Liao. Microfluidic wearable electrochemical sweat sensors for health monitoring. Biomicrofluidics 2022, 16 (5) https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0116648
  44. Giraso Keza Monia Kabandana, Tao Zhang, Chengpeng Chen. Emerging 3D printing technologies and methodologies for microfluidic development. Analytical Methods 2022, 14 (30) , 2885-2906. https://doi.org/10.1039/D2AY00798C
  45. Jack Kingman, Marcus K. Dymond. Fused filament fabrication and water contact angle anisotropy: The effect of layer height and raster width on the wettability of 3D printed polylactic acid parts. Chemical Data Collections 2022, 40 , 100884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cdc.2022.100884
  46. Ujwala Bhanakar, Amit Kumar Pal, Biswabina Ray. Three-dimensional (3D) printing: A potentially versatile tool in the field of medicine. Indian Journal of Clinical Anatomy and Physiology 2022, 9 (2) , 78-84. https://doi.org/10.18231/j.ijcap.2022.020
  47. Cristiane Kalinke, Paulo Roberto de Oliveira, Bruno Campos Janegitz, Juliano Alves Bonacin. Prussian blue nanoparticles anchored on activated 3D printed sensor for the detection of -cysteine. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2022, 362 , 131797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2022.131797
  48. Joule E. Esene, Mawla Boaks, Anna V. Bickham, Gregory P. Nordin, Adam T. Woolley. 3D printed microfluidic device for automated, pressure-driven, valve-injected microchip electrophoresis of preterm birth biomarkers. Microchimica Acta 2022, 189 (5) https://doi.org/10.1007/s00604-022-05303-8
  49. Xinpeng Ren, Sepideh Keshan Balavandy, Feng Li, Michael C. Breadmore, Fernando Maya. Miniaturized 3D printed solid-phase extraction cartridges with integrated porous frits. Analytica Chimica Acta 2022, 1208 , 339790. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2022.339790
  50. Chisomo Zimphango, Farah C. Alimagham, Keri L. H. Carpenter, Peter J. Hutchinson, Tanya Hutter. Monitoring Neurochemistry in Traumatic Brain Injury Patients Using Microdialysis Integrated with Biosensors: A Review. Metabolites 2022, 12 (5) , 393. https://doi.org/10.3390/metabo12050393
  51. Mario Del Rosario, Hannah S. Heil, Afonso Mendes, Vittorio Saggiomo, Ricardo Henriques. The Field Guide to 3D Printing in Optical Microscopy for Life Sciences. Advanced Biology 2022, 6 (4) https://doi.org/10.1002/adbi.202100994
  52. Damien K Ming, Saylee Jangam, Sally A N Gowers, Richard Wilson, David M E Freeman, Martyn G Boutelle, Anthony E G Cass, Danny O’Hare, Alison H Holmes. Real-time continuous measurement of lactate through a minimally invasive microneedle patch: a phase I clinical study. BMJ Innovations 2022, 8 (2) , 87-94. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjinnov-2021-000864
  53. Daniel Sim, Michael C. Brothers, Joseph M. Slocik, Ahmad E. Islam, Benji Maruyama, Claude C. Grigsby, Rajesh R. Naik, Steve S. Kim. Biomarkers and Detection Platforms for Human Health and Performance Monitoring: A Review. Advanced Science 2022, 9 (7) https://doi.org/10.1002/advs.202104426
  54. Md. Azahar Ali, Chunshan Hu, Eric A. Yttri, Rahul Panat. Recent Advances in 3D Printing of Biomedical Sensing Devices. Advanced Functional Materials 2022, 32 (9) https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202107671
  55. Shikha Saxena, Deepshikha Pande Katare. 3D-printed device with integrated biosensors for biomedical applications. 2022, 271-283. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823424-2.00018-1
  56. Neda Irannejad, Behzad Rezaei. Three-dimensional electrodes. 2022, 177-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823148-7.00007-6
  57. Agnivo Gosai, Md. Azahar Ali. Metal oxidesbased microfluidic biosensing. 2022, 233-263. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-823033-6.00008-9
  58. Sunil Mehla, PR. Selvakannan, Maciej Mazur, Suresh K. Bhargava. Emerging Technological Applications of Additive Manufacturing. 2022, 169-238. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-2293-0_7
  59. Xue Han, Yonghui Zhang, Jingkun Tian, Tiange Wu, Zongwen Li, Fei Xing, Shenggui Fu. Polymer‐based microfluidic devices: A comprehensive review on preparation and applications. Polymer Engineering & Science 2022, 62 (1) , 3-24. https://doi.org/10.1002/pen.25831
  60. Gyeongyeong Lee, Yeong-Hoon Noh, In-Gon Lee, Ic-Pyo Hong, Jong-Gwan Yook, Jong-Yeong Kim, Jihoon Kim. 3D printing of metasurface-based dual-linear polarization converter. Flexible and Printed Electronics 2021, 6 (4) , 045012. https://doi.org/10.1088/2058-8585/ac3dff
  61. Ashish Kalkal, Sumit Kumar, Pramod Kumar, Rangadhar Pradhan, Magnus Willander, Gopinath Packirisamy, Saurabh Kumar, Bansi Dhar Malhotra. Recent advances in 3D printing technologies for wearable (bio)sensors. Additive Manufacturing 2021, 46 , 102088. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addma.2021.102088
  62. Anna-Maria Spehar-Délèze, Salzitsa Anastasova, Pankaj Vadgama. Monitoring of Lactate in Interstitial Fluid, Saliva and Sweat by Electrochemical Biosensor: The Uncertainties of Biological Interpretation. Chemosensors 2021, 9 (8) , 195. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors9080195
  63. Merima Sirbubalo, Amina Tucak, Kenan Muhamedagic, Lamija Hindija, Ognjenka Rahić, Jasmina Hadžiabdić, Ahmet Cekic, Derzija Begic-Hajdarevic, Maida Cohodar Husic, Almir Dervišević, Edina Vranić. 3D Printing—A “Touch-Button” Approach to Manufacture Microneedles for Transdermal Drug Delivery. Pharmaceutics 2021, 13 (7) , 924. https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmaceutics13070924
  64. Panagiota Koralli, Dionysios E. Mouzakis. Advances in Wearable Chemosensors. Chemosensors 2021, 9 (5) , 99. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors9050099
  65. Tao Yu, Jidong Zhao. Semi-coupled resolved CFD–DEM simulation of powder-based selective laser melting for additive manufacturing. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering 2021, 377 , 113707. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cma.2021.113707
  66. Priyanka Prabhakar, Raj Kumar Sen, Neeraj Dwivedi, Raju Khan, Pratima R. Solanki, Avanish Kumar Srivastava, Chetna Dhand. 3D-Printed Microfluidics and Potential Biomedical Applications. Frontiers in Nanotechnology 2021, 3 https://doi.org/10.3389/fnano.2021.609355
  67. Moe Elbadawi, Jun Jie Ong, Thomas D. Pollard, Simon Gaisford, Abdul W. Basit. Additive Manufacturable Materials for Electrochemical Biosensor Electrodes. Advanced Functional Materials 2021, 31 (10) https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202006407
  68. Andrea Rogolino, Gianpaolo Savio. Trends in additively manufactured microfluidics, microreactors and catalytic materials. Materials Advances 2021, 2 (3) , 845-855. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0MA00704H
  69. Feng LIU, Jing-Long HAN, Ji QI, Yu ZHANG, Jia-Luo YU, Wen-Peng LI, Dong LIN, Ling-Xin CHEN, Bo-Wei LI. Research and Application Progress of Intelligent Wearable Devices. Chinese Journal of Analytical Chemistry 2021, 49 (2) , 159-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2040(20)60076-7
  70. Atul Sharma, Mihaela Badea, Swapnil Tiwari, Jean Louis Marty. Wearable Biosensors: An Alternative and Practical Approach in Healthcare and Disease Monitoring. Molecules 2021, 26 (3) , 748. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26030748
  71. Saeid Maghsoudi, Navid Rabiee, Sepideh Ahmadi, Mohammad Rabiee, Mojtaba Bagherzadeh, Mahdi Karimi. An overview of microfluidic devices. 2021, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818791-3.00005-X
  72. Ranjit Barua, Sudipto Datta, Pavel Sengupta, Amit Roy Chowdhury, Pallab Datta. Advances in MEMS micropumps and their emerging drug delivery and biomedical applications. 2021, 411-452. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-820043-8.00002-5
  73. Momen K. Tageldeen, Sally A. N. Gowers, Chi L. Leong, Martyn G. Boutelle, Emmanuel M. Drakakis. Traumatic brain injury neuroelectrochemical monitoring: behind-the-ear micro-instrument and cloud application. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation 2020, 17 (1) https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-020-00742-x
  74. K. Theyagarajan, Mari Elancheziyan, Prakash Sinha Aayushi, Kathavarayan Thenmozhi. Facile strategy for immobilizing horseradish peroxidase on a novel acetate functionalized ionic liquid/MWCNT matrix for electrochemical biosensing. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules 2020, 163 , 358-365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2020.07.005
  75. Xiaofan Ruan, Yijia Wang, Nan Cheng, Xiangheng Niu, Yu‐Chung Chang, Lei Li, Dan Du, Yuehe Lin. Emerging Applications of Additive Manufacturing in Biosensors and Bioanalytical Devices. Advanced Materials Technologies 2020, 5 (7) https://doi.org/10.1002/admt.202000171
  76. Siyuan Zhang, Lin Fu. Research Progress of 3D Printing Microfluidic Chip. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 2020, 1549 (5) , 052055. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1549/5/052055
  77. Pankaj Vadgama. Monitoring with In Vivo Electrochemical Sensors: Navigating the Complexities of Blood and Tissue Reactivity. Sensors 2020, 20 (11) , 3149. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20113149
  78. Hadil M. Elbardisy, Eduardo M. Richter, Robert D. Crapnell, Michael P. Down, Peter G. Gough, Tarek S. Belal, Wael Talaat, Hoda G. Daabees, Craig E. Banks. Versatile additively manufactured (3D printed) wall-jet flow cell for high performance liquid chromatography-amperometric analysis: application to the detection and quantification of new psychoactive substances (NBOMes). Analytical Methods 2020, 12 (16) , 2152-2165. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0AY00500B
  79. Priyadarsini Sreenivasan, Jijo Wilson, Prabha Damodaran Nair, Lynda Velutheril Thomas. Polycaprolactone solution–based ink for designing microfluidic channels on paper via 3D printing platform for biosensing application. Polymers for Advanced Technologies 2020, 31 (5) , 1139-1149. https://doi.org/10.1002/pat.4848
  80. Elizabeth A. Hayter, Andre D. Castiaux, R. Scott Martin. 3D-printed microfluidic device with in-line amperometric detection that also enables multi-modal detection. Analytical Methods 2020, 12 (15) , 2046-2051. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0AY00368A
  81. Mohammad Reza Khosravani, Tamara Reinicke. 3D-printed sensors: Current progress and future challenges. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2020, 305 , 111916. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2020.111916
  82. Zhina Hadisi, Tavia Walsh, Seyed Mohammad Hossein Dabiri, Amir Seyfoori, Brent Godeau, Gabriel Charest, David Fortin, Mohsen Akbari. 3D Printing for the Future of Medicine. Journal of 3D Printing in Medicine 2020, 4 (1) , 45-67. https://doi.org/10.2217/3dp-2019-0010
  83. Sally A. N. Gowers, Isabelle C. Samper, De-Shaine R. K. Murray, Georgia K. Smith, Sarah Jeyaprakash, Michelle L. Rogers, Michael Karlsson, Markus Harboe Olsen, Kirsten Møller, Martyn G. Boutelle. Real-time neurochemical measurement of dynamic metabolic events during cardiac arrest and resuscitation in a porcine model. The Analyst 2020, 145 (5) , 1894-1902. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9AN01950B
  84. Rafael M. Cardoso, Pablo R.L. Silva, Ana P. Lima, Diego P. Rocha, Thiago C. Oliveira, Thiago M. do Prado, Elson L. Fava, Orlando Fatibello-Filho, Eduardo M. Richter, Rodrigo A.A. Muñoz. 3D-Printed graphene/polylactic acid electrode for bioanalysis: Biosensing of glucose and simultaneous determination of uric acid and nitrite in biological fluids. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2020, 307 , 127621. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2019.127621
  85. L. Siebert, M. I. Terasa, N. Ababii, O. Lupan, R. Adelung. 3D-Printed Sensor Array of Semiconducting Oxides. 2020, 3-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-31866-6_1
  86. Abir Dutta, Trina Roy, Preetam Guha Ray, Ragavi Rajasekaran, Mamoni Banerjee, Santanu Chattopadhyay, Sanjay Gupta, Santanu Dhara. 3D Printing: Challenges and Its Prospect in Futuristic Tissue Engineering Applications. 2020, 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-5424-7_1
  87. Onur Parlak, Vincenzo F. Curto, Edilberto Ojeda, Lourdes Basabe-Desmonts, Fernando Benito-Lopez, Alberto Salleo. Wearable biosensors and sample handling strategies. 2020, 65-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-102407-2.00004-7
  88. John R. Aggas, Anthony Guiseppi-Elie. Responsive Polymers in the Fabrication of Enzyme-Based Biosensors. 2020, 1267-1286. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-816137-1.00079-9
  89. Bhavik A. Patel. Electrochemical biosensors. 2020, 267-284. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-821203-5.00008-7
  90. Wondimu A. Gebreyes, Lorenzo Migliorini, Federico Pezzotta, Yosi Shacham-Diamand, Tommaso Santaniello, Paolo Milani. An integrated fluidic electrochemical sensor manufactured using fused filament fabrication and supersonic cluster beam deposition. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical 2020, 301 , 111706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2019.111706
  91. Chi Leng Leong, Sharon Coleman, Adrian M. Nightingale, Sammer-ul Hassan, David Voegeli, Martyn G. Boutelle, Xize Niu. Lactate monitoring in droplet microfluidics: a cautionary tale in assay miniaturisation. Analytical Methods 2019, 11 (48) , 6119-6123. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9AY02070E
  92. Adrian M. Nightingale, Chi Leng Leong, Rachel A. Burnish, Sammer-ul Hassan, Yu Zhang, Geraldine F. Clough, Martyn G. Boutelle, David Voegeli, Xize Niu. Monitoring biomolecule concentrations in tissue using a wearable droplet microfluidic-based sensor. Nature Communications 2019, 10 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-10401-y
  93. Mattias Björnmalm, Lok Man Wong, Jonathan P. Wojciechowski, Jelle Penders, Conor C. Horgan, Marsilea A. Booth, Nicholas G. Martin, Susanne Sattler, Molly M. Stevens. In vivo biocompatibility and immunogenicity of metal–phenolic gelation. Chemical Science 2019, 10 (43) , 10179-10194. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9SC03325D
  94. Shuang Cindy Cao, Jongwon Jung, Mileva Radonjic. Application of microfluidic pore models for flow, transport, and reaction in geological porous media: from a single test bed to multifunction real-time analysis tool. Microsystem Technologies 2019, 25 (11) , 4035-4052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00542-019-04612-y
  95. Bin Yang, Jilie Kong, Xueen Fang. Bandage-like wearable flexible microfluidic recombinase polymerase amplification sensor for the rapid visual detection of nucleic acids. Talanta 2019, 204 , 685-692. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2019.06.031
  96. Tautgirdas Ruzgas, Nutcha Larpant, Atefeh Shafaat, Javier Sotres. Wireless, Battery‐Less Biosensors Based on Direct Electron Transfer Reactions. ChemElectroChem 2019, 6 (20) , 5167-5171. https://doi.org/10.1002/celc.201901015
  97. Sven Bettermann, Robin Stuhr, Hans-Ulrich Moritz, Werner Pauer. Customizable 3D-printed stirrers for investigation, optimization and scale-up processes of batch emulsion copolymerizations. Chemical Engineering Science 2019, 206 , 50-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2019.05.026
  98. Xiaoxuan Zhang, Yuanjin Zhao. Wearable droplet microfluidics. Science Bulletin 2019, 64 (20) , 1472-1473. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scib.2019.08.006
  99. Jacky F.C. Loo, Aaron H.P. Ho, Anthony P.F. Turner, Wing Cheung Mak. Integrated Printed Microfluidic Biosensors. Trends in Biotechnology 2019, 37 (10) , 1104-1120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibtech.2019.03.009
  100. Amir K Miri, Ebrahim Mostafavi, Danial Khorsandi, Shu-Kai Hu, Matthew Malpica, Ali Khademhosseini. Bioprinters for organs-on-chips. Biofabrication 2019, 11 (4) , 042002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1758-5090/ab2798
Load all citations

Analytical Chemistry

Cite this: Anal. Chem. 2015, 87, 15, 7763–7770
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b01353
Published June 12, 2015

Copyright © 2015 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under CC-BY.

Article Views

9199

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. A. Standard microdialysis setup for discrete sampling. The probe (a) is perfused at a fixed low flow rate, and dialysate is collected into a microvial (b) at the probe outlet. Right: shows the microvial when connected to the probe outlet holder. B. Photograph of combined needle electrode based on a 27G hypodermic needle and schematic cross-section of the needle tip, showing the layers that make up the biosensor: (i) m-PD exclusion layer, (ii) substrate oxidase (SOx) entrapped in a hydrogel, and (iii) diffusion limiting polyurethane outer film. C. Exploded view of custom-made microfluidic device for continuous monitoring of dialysate, showing the multicomponent system. The microfluidic chip (e) connects to the probe outlet holder (c) in place of a microvial. The outlet holder needle enters the microvial rubber insert (d) at the inlet of the microfluidic chip. Glucose and lactate needle biosensors (f) are housed in custom-made electrode holders (g) that screw into the microfluidic chip, placing the biosensors in the middle of the microfluidic channel and providing a good seal between the holder and the microfluidic device. (h) shows a photograph of an electrode holder containing a needle biosensor. The black part at the base of the holder is made of soft, compressible plastic to ensure the holder makes a good seal with the microfluidic chip. D. The L-shaped design provides a tidy and compact overall system.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. A. Normalized current response of a 50 μm disc glucose (red) and lactate (green) biosensor in a stirred beaker to a 2 mM concentration step (purple arrow). B. The graph shows the normalized current for a glucose biosensor to a step change from 0 to 2 mM at 1 μL/min in three different microfluidic channels. The measured channel sizes are shown in the table inset. The response time increases as the channel dimension increases.

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Typical calibration curves for 50 μm disc glucose and lactate biosensors in the microfluidic device at 1 μL/min. Mean ± standard deviation of measurement shown (n = 4). Points fitted with the Michaelis–Menten equation. Inset: Raw data for a typical 5-point lactate calibration from 0 to 4 mM in 1 mM steps.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. A. Photograph of microfluidic device to measure tissue glucose and lactate levels in dialysate during the cycling protocol. Dialysate flowed into the microfluidic chip, housing the glucose and lactate biosensors, which were connected to wireless potentiostats, secured onto the bike. B. Experimental protocol. Tissue levels were monitored during an initial resting period (i), followed by cycling at 4 levels of increasing rpm (ii-v), a level of warming down (vi), and a final period of resting (vii). C. Dialysate glucose and lactate levels during the exercise phase of the cycling protocol. The bottom graph shows the glucose (red) and lactate (green) levels, the middle graph (black) shows the lactate/glucose ratio, and the top graph shows the rotations per minute (blue) and heart rate (purple) throughout the cycling protocol. Glucose and lactate traces have been despiked. (39) The dotted lines indicate the stages of varying cycling intensity: (ii) 55 rpm, (iii) 65 rpm, (iv) 75 rpm, (v) sprint, and (vi) 55 rpm. Data has been time-aligned, taking into account the time delay of the system. D. Histograms showing mean dialysate levels for two different cyclists during key points in cycling protocol. Labels correspond to stages described in the experimental protocol: (i) baseline (ii) midway through warm up, (iii) midway through medium intensity, (iv) midway through high intensity, (v) end of sprint, (vi) end of warm down, and (vii) after 50 min of recovery.

  • References


    This article references 42 other publications.

    1. 1
      Body Sensor Networks; Yang, G.-Z., Ed.; Springer: 2014.
    2. 2
      Matzeu, G.; Florea, L.; Diamond, D. Sens. Actuators, B 2015, 211, 403 418
    3. 3
      Rogers, M. L.; Boutelle, M. G. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2013, 6, 427 453
    4. 4
      Diamond, D.; Coyle, S.; Scarmagnani, S.; Hayes, J. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 652 679
    5. 5
      Windmiller, J. R.; Wang, J. Electroanalysis 2013, 25, 29 46
    6. 6
      Woderer, S.; Henninger, N.; Garthe, C. D.; Kloetzer, H. M.; Hajnsek, M.; Kamecke, U.; Gretz, N.; Kraenzlin, B.; Pill, J. Anal. Chim. Acta 2007, 581, 7 12
    7. 7
      Facchinetti, A.; Sparacino, G.; Cobelli, C. J. Diabetes Sci. Technol. 2007, 1, 617 623
    8. 8
      Curto, V. F.; Fay, C.; Coyle, S.; Byrne, R.; O’Toole, C.; Barry, C.; Hughes, S.; Moyna, N.; Diamond, D.; Benito-Lopez, F. Sens. Actuators, B Chem. 2012, 171–172, 1327 1334
    9. 9
      Jia, W.; Bandodkar, A. J.; Valde, G.; Windmiller, J. R.; Yang, Z.; Ram, J.; Chan, G.; Wang, J. Anal. Chem. 2013, 85, 6553 6560
    10. 10
      Kabilan, S.; Ph, D.; Lowe, C. Diabetes Technol. Ther. 2006, 8, 89 93
    11. 11
      Iguchi, S.; Kudo, H.; Saito, T.; Ogawa, M.; Saito, H.; Otsuka, K.; Funakubo, A.; Mitsubayashi, K. Biomed. Microdevices 2007, 9, 603 609
    12. 12
      Yoda, K.; Shimazaki, K.; Ueda, Y.; Ann, N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1998, 864, 600 604
    13. 13
      Mannoor, M. S.; Tao, H.; Clayton, J. D.; Sengupta, A.; Kaplan, D. L.; Naik, R. R.; Verma, N.; Omenetto, F. G.; McAlpine, M. C. Graphene-based wireless bacteria detection on tooth enamel Nat. Commun. 2012, 3, 763
    14. 14
      Krustrup, P.; Mohr, M.; Steensberg, A.; Bencke, J.; Kjaer, M.; Bangsbo, J. Med. Sci. Sports Exercise 2006, 38, 1165 1174
    15. 15
      Watson, C. J.; Venton, B. J.; Kennedy, R. T. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78, 1391 1399
    16. 16
      Parkin, M. C.; Hopwood, S. E.; Boutelle, M. G.; Strong, A. J. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem. 2003, 22, 487 497
    17. 17
      Schultz, K. N.; Kennedy, R. T. Annu. Rev. Anal. Chem. 2008, 1, 627 661
    18. 18
      Nandi, P.; Lunte, S. M. Anal. Chim. Acta 2009, 651, 1 14
    19. 19
      Rogers, M. L.; Brennan, P. A.; Leong, C. L.; Gowers, S. A. N.; Aldridge, T.; Mellor, T. K.; Boutelle, M. G. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2013, 405, 3881 3888
    20. 20
      Rogers, M. L.; Feuerstein, D.; Leong, C. L.; Takagaki, M.; Niu, X.; Graf, R.; Boutelle, M. G. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2013, 4, 799 807
    21. 21
      Deeba, S.; Corcoles, E. P.; Hanna, G. B.; Hanna, B. G.; Pareskevas, P.; Aziz, O.; Boutelle, M. G.; Darzi, A. Dis. Colon Rectum 2008, 51, 1408 1413
    22. 22
      Birke-Sorensen, H. J. Transplant. 2012, 2012, 970630
    23. 23
      Wang, M.; Roman, G. T.; Schultz, K.; Jennings, C.; Kennedy, R. T. Anal. Chem. 2008, 80, 5607 5615
    24. 24
      Sun, S.; Slaney, T. R.; Kennedy, R. T. Anal. Chem. 2012, 84, 5794 5800
    25. 25
      Nandi, P.; Desai, D. P.; Lunte, S. M. Electrophoresis 2010, 31, 1414 1422
    26. 26
      Lucca, B. G.; Lunte, S. M.; Tomazelli Coltro, W. K.; Ferreira, V. S. Electrophoresis 2014, 35, 3363 3370
    27. 27
      Rogers, M.; Leong, C.; Niu, X.; de Mello, A.; Parker, K. H.; Boutelle, M. G. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2011, 13, 5298 5303
    28. 28
      Taylor, G. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 1953, 219, 186 203
    29. 29
      Lunte, S. M.; Nandi, P.; Regel, A.; Grigsby, R.; Hulvey, M. K.; Scott, D.; Naylor, E.; Gabbert, S.; Johnson, D. In 14th International Conference on Miniaturized Systems for Chemistry and Life Sciences; 2010; pp 1535 1537.
    30. 30
      Erkal, J. L.; Selimovic, A.; Gross, B. C.; Lockwood, S. Y.; Walton, E. L.; McNamara, S.; Martin, R. S.; Spence, D. M. Lab Chip 2014, 14, 2023 2032
    31. 31
      Kitson, P. J.; Rosnes, M. H.; Sans, V.; Dragone, V.; Cronin, L. Lab Chip 2012, 12, 3267
    32. 32
      Therriault, D.; White, S. R.; Lewis, J. A. Nat. Mater. 2003, 2, 265 271
    33. 33
      Snowden, M. E.; King, P. H.; Covington, J. a; Macpherson, J. V.; Unwin, P. R. Anal. Chem. 2010, 82, 3124 3131
    34. 34
      Anderson, K. B.; Lockwood, S. Y.; Martin, R. S.; Spence, D. M. Anal. Chem. 2013, 85, 5622 5626
    35. 35
      Waldbaur, A.; Rapp, H.; Länge, K.; Rapp, B. E. Anal. Methods 2011, 3, 2681
    36. 36
      Patel, B. A.; Rogers, M.; Wieder, T.; O’Hare, D.; Boutelle, M. G. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2011, 26, 2890 2896
    37. 37
      Viggiano, A.; Marinesco, S.; Pain, F.; Meiller, A.; Gurden, H. J. Neurosci. Methods 2012, 206, 1 6
    38. 38
      Vasylieva, N.; Barnych, B.; Meiller, A.; Maucler, C.; Pollegioni, L.; Lin, J.-S.; Barbier, D.; Marinesco, S. Biosens. Bioelectron 2011, 26, 3993 4000
    39. 39
      Feuerstein, D.; Parker, K. H.; Boutelle, M. G. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 4987 4994
    40. 40
      Heinonen, I.; Kalliokoski, K. K.; Hannukainen, J. C.; Duncker, D. J.; Nuutila, P.; Knuuti, J. Physiology (Bethesda) 2014, 29, 421 436
    41. 41
      Timofeev, I.; Carpenter, K. L. H.; Nortje, J.; Al-Rawi, P. G.; O’Connell, M. T.; Czosnyka, M.; Smielewski, P.; Pickard, J. D.; Menon, D. K.; Kirkpatrick, P. J.; Gupta, A. K.; Hutchinson, P. J. Brain 2011, 134, 484 494
    42. 42
      Kristensen, D. L.; Ladefoged, S. A; Sloth, E.; Aagaard, R.; Birke-Sørensen, H. Br. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2013, 51, 117 122
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information


    Additional information as noted in text (Figures S1–S3 and supporting videos 1 and 2). The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.5b01353. Data supporting this publication can be obtained on request from [email protected].


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.