2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2022.114476
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An impedimetric biosensor for COVID-19 serology test and modification of sensor performance via dielectrophoresis force

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 52 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Advanced optical sensor technologies (Table 3) such as photonic [27] and surface plasmon resonance sensors [28,29] are able to provide results within 10 min, whereas more traditional approaches require more time (LFA, ELISA, 15-60 min) [30,31].On the other hand, electrochemical sensors require a mean response time of approximately 30 min [32][33][34][35][36]. Taking into account the above-mentioned, our biosensor is able to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in an ultra-rapid manner (3 min) and at quite low concentrations (5 ng/mL).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Advanced optical sensor technologies (Table 3) such as photonic [27] and surface plasmon resonance sensors [28,29] are able to provide results within 10 min, whereas more traditional approaches require more time (LFA, ELISA, 15-60 min) [30,31].On the other hand, electrochemical sensors require a mean response time of approximately 30 min [32][33][34][35][36]. Taking into account the above-mentioned, our biosensor is able to detect SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in an ultra-rapid manner (3 min) and at quite low concentrations (5 ng/mL).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…biosensors are theoretically favoured for POC diagnostics and device integration because they can directly detect biorecognition events by measuring the non-faradaic resistance and capacitance properties of the sensing electrode; however, their practical implementation suffers from non-specific binding of non-target compounds, which leads to low sensitivity and selectivity. In addition, although impedimetric biosensors have been greatly improved during the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, using molecular imprinting technology to fabricate virusimprinted impedimetric biosensors for sensitive detection of whole virus particles 22 or by applying a dielectrophoresis force to improve the detection sensitivity of impedimetric immunosensors fabricated on Au micro-interdigitated electrodes 23 , their proof-of-concept performance is often only demonstrated using artificial physiological samples instead of clinically relevant samples.…”
Section: Review Articlementioning
confidence: 99%
“…5B shows the concepts, electrode modification, immunosensor, and the corresponding The biosensor comprised gold micro-interdigitated electrodes and viral Spike-S proteins from the virus that were coated between the electrode digits to trap anti-S antibodies in the samples. 146 The work introduced two approaches to improve the sensitivity of the impedimetric sensor, including the use of secondary antibody-gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) and dielectrophoresis force to concentrate the target antibody. The AuNP approach reached a LoD of 200 ng mL −1 , while the DEP method had a LoD of 2 μg mL −1 but had a faster testing time of only 30 minutes.…”
Section: Electrochemical Impedance Biosensor Applicationsmentioning
confidence: 99%