2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2011.09.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Finite element analysis of oxygen transport in microfluidic cell culture devices with varying channel architectures, perfusion rates, and materials

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

2
28
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 25 publications
(30 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
2
28
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Considering a hepatocyte-compatible wall shear stress of τ w = 15 μPa on the surface of the hydrogel construct, the v in was fixed at 7.1 × 10 −7 m/s and 7.1 × 10 −6 m/s, respectively, for the micro-and the milli-fluidic systems. These velocities are consistent with those typically reported for micro-fluidic cell culture devices [42]. For the MCmB model, the v in was set to 3.82 × 10 −3 m/s (corresponding to 180 μL/min inflow), on the basis of previous experiments with this bioreactor [31,[62][63][64][65][66].…”
Section: Model Implementationsupporting
confidence: 60%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Considering a hepatocyte-compatible wall shear stress of τ w = 15 μPa on the surface of the hydrogel construct, the v in was fixed at 7.1 × 10 −7 m/s and 7.1 × 10 −6 m/s, respectively, for the micro-and the milli-fluidic systems. These velocities are consistent with those typically reported for micro-fluidic cell culture devices [42]. For the MCmB model, the v in was set to 3.82 × 10 −3 m/s (corresponding to 180 μL/min inflow), on the basis of previous experiments with this bioreactor [31,[62][63][64][65][66].…”
Section: Model Implementationsupporting
confidence: 60%
“…According to previous considerations (Section 2), the smallest physiologically relevant in vitro model is a 0.2 × 20 × 0.2 mm 3 parallelepiped containing 7 × 10 7 cells/mL (i.e., 10 functional units in terms of cell number and 1/10 of native cell density). Thus, in both systems the bottom area of the fluid channel was considered equal to the cell construct surface (i.e., 0.2 × 20 mm 2 ), while its thickness (h) was taken as 0.2 mm or 2 mm, respectively for the micro-and milli-scaled fluidic channels ( Figure 3) [30,42,43]. Second, as a case study we considered a real bioreactor, the Multi-Compartmental modular Bioreactor (MCmB, Figure 4).…”
Section: Modelled Configurationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In these microfluidic culture devices, poly (dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) has become the most popular material because of its simple fabrication process, low cost, optical transparency, biocompatibility and gas permeability (Duffy et al, 1998;Gao et al, 2012). Using gas permeability properties, several PDMSbased microfluidic devices have been developed to generate desired oxygen (Adler et al, 2010;Chen et al, 2011;Inamdar et al, 2011;Polinkovsky et al, 2009;Shiku et al, 2006;Skolimowski et al, 2010;Zahorodny-Burke et al, 2011) and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) (Forry and Locascio, 2011;Polinkovsky et al, 2009;Takano et al, 2012) concentrations for cell cultures.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…microfluidic devices for establishing hypoxia in cell cultures [12]. Many of these studies apply mathematical modelling to verify that they are correctly maintaining their target O 2 levels [1315, 17, 18]. …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%