» Articles » PMID: 35519028

Dielectrophoretic Separation of Platelet Cells in a Microfluidic Channel and Optimization with Fuzzy Logic

Overview
Journal RSC Adv
Specialty Chemistry
Date 2022 May 6
PMID 35519028
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

It is the aim to develop optimization techniques to separate platelets from Red Blood Cells (RBCs) after designing and analyzing a microfluidic chip in this study. RBCs and platelets are present in the blood, but some healthcare applications require either platelets or RBCs. Therefore, it is necessary to separate platelets from RBCs. In this study, the design and analysis of the microfluidic chip were carried out with the Comsol Multiphysics program. Since the separation of platelets and RBCs in the blood flowing from a channel is provided by the Dielectrophoretic (DEP) force technique, the DEP force feature was given importance in the design of microfluidic channels. Much data was obtained while designing and analyzing processes. It has been observed that the voltage applied to the microfluidic channel and the inlet velocity of the blood affect the fluidic velocity and pressure along the microfluidic channel. It was also understood that the separation of platelets from RBCs depends on input data. Input and output data were analyzed in the Comsol Multiphysics program, and the optimization of the microfluidic chip was realized with the Matlab-Fuzzy Logic program. In order for the platelets to be separated from the RBCs, the optimum voltage to be applied to the microfluidic chip should be in the range of 4-6 V and the inlet velocity of the blood in the range of 800-900 μm s. When these input values are given, the maximum pressure affecting the microfluidic outlet channel is 10-12 Pa, and the maximum velocity is in the range of 1.25-1.5 mm s. These results are the optimum values required to separate platelets from RBCs.

Citing Articles

Microfluidic Blood Separation: Key Technologies and Critical Figures of Merit.

Torres-Castro K, Acuna-Umana K, Lesser-Rojas L, Reyes D Micromachines (Basel). 2023; 14(11).

PMID: 38004974 PMC: 10672873. DOI: 10.3390/mi14112117.


On-chip dielectrophoretic device for cancer cell manipulation: A numerical and artificial neural network study.

Mohammadi R, Afsaneh H, Rezaei B, Moghimi Zand M Biomicrofluidics. 2023; 17(2):024102.

PMID: 36896355 PMC: 9991445. DOI: 10.1063/5.0131806.


Numerical simulation and parameter optimization of micromixer device using fuzzy logic technique.

K K, Kandasamy S, P S, Alodhayb A RSC Adv. 2023; 13(7):4504-4522.

PMID: 36760289 PMC: 9893881. DOI: 10.1039/d2ra07992e.


A comprehensive review on advancements in tissue engineering and microfluidics toward kidney-on-chip.

Sateesh J, Guha K, Dutta A, Sengupta P, Yalamanchili D, Donepudi N Biomicrofluidics. 2022; 16(4):041501.

PMID: 35992641 PMC: 9385224. DOI: 10.1063/5.0087852.

References
1.
Thomas R, Mitchell P, Oreffo R, Morgan H, Green N . Image-based sorting and negative dielectrophoresis for high purity cell and particle separation. Electrophoresis. 2019; 40(20):2718-2727. DOI: 10.1002/elps.201800489. View

2.
Kikkeri K, Kerr B, Bertke A, Strobl J, Agah M . Passivated-electrode insulator-based dielectrophoretic separation of heterogeneous cell mixtures. J Sep Sci. 2020; 43(8):1576-1585. DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201900553. View

3.
Jiang A, Yale A, Aghaamoo M, Lee D, Lee A, Adams T . High-throughput continuous dielectrophoretic separation of neural stem cells. Biomicrofluidics. 2019; 13(6):064111. PMC: 6853802. DOI: 10.1063/1.5128797. View

4.
Gallo-Villanueva R, Perez-Gonzalez V, Cardenas-Benitez B, Jind B, Martinez-Chapa S, Lapizco-Encinas B . Joule heating effects in optimized insulator-based dielectrophoretic devices: An interplay between post geometry and temperature rise. Electrophoresis. 2019; 40(10):1408-1416. DOI: 10.1002/elps.201800490. View

5.
Anz A, Parsa R, Romero-Creel M, Nabors A, Tucker M, Harrison R . Exercise-Mobilized Platelet-Rich Plasma: Short-Term Exercise Increases Stem Cell and Platelet Concentrations in Platelet-Rich Plasma. Arthroscopy. 2019; 35(1):192-200. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2018.06.043. View