Nanomaterials and Their Recent Applications in Impedimetric Biosensing

Abstract

Impedimetric biosensors measure changes in the electrical impedance due to a biochemical process, typically the binding of a biomolecule to a bioreceptor on the sensor surface. Nanomaterials can be employed to modify the biosensor’s surface to increase the surface area available for biorecognition events, thereby improving the sensitivity and detection limits of the biosensor. Various nanomaterials, such as carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, quantum dots, metal nanoparticles, and graphene oxide nanoparticles, have been investigated for impedimetric biosensors. These nanomaterials have yielded promising results in improving sensitivity, selectivity, and overall biosensor performance. Hence, they offer a wide range of possibilities for developing advanced biosensing platforms that can be employed in various fields, including healthcare, environmental monitoring, and food safety. This review focuses on the recent developments in nanoparticle-functionalized electrochemical-impedimetric biosensors.

Recent Progress of Electrochemical Aptasensors toward AFB1 Detection (2018–2023)

“…They allow for real-time quantification thanks to the capacity of kinetic monitorization of the receptor-target interaction [116] and the lack of labeling leads to lower development costs [118]. Most importantly, the binding affinity of the sequences would be unaffected by an extra labeling process [119] as the aptamertarget interaction is mostly monitored by non-invasive electrochemical techniques, such as EIS [120].…”

Electrodeposited folic acid platinum electrode for rapid detection of human hepatocellular carcinoma cells

“…The CV measurement was recorded in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.2) containing 5 mM K 4 [Fe(CN) 6 ] and 0.1 M KCl in the potential region of À 0.3 V to + 0.9 V. This potential window was chosen as the oxidation (300 mV) and reduction (200 mV) potential peak of the electrolyte solution lies in this region [39]. The use of K 4 [Fe(CN) 6 ] in an electrolyte is advantageous due to its well-defined, stable, and reversible redox potential [13,40]. Particularly the low oxidation potential of K 4 [Fe(CN) 6 ] helps avoid interference with the occurrence of electrochemical responses of desired biomolecule species in the study.…”

“…Researchers have fabricated various analytical devices to detect FA such as spectrophotometry [8], high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) [9], colorimetric [10], flow injection chemiluminescence [11] and fluorimetric [12]. However, these methods possess challenges like highcost instrumental setup, expertise in operating the instruments, sample pre-treatment, and time-consuming procedure [13]. To tackle these issues, electrochemical in-situ detection-based methods have gained attention to investigate the presence of biomarkers [14][15][16][17][18][19][20].…”

The Development of a Specific Nanofiber Bioreceptor for Detection of Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus from Air

“…However, biosensors reduce costs (in some cases up to 96% [9], but on average, around 40% [10] and time (from hours with PCR to units to tens of minutes with biosensors [11]). Among other things, device sensitivity can be increased by incorporating nanomaterials [12][13][14][15][16][17][18] into the biosensor system, and it is possible to achieve LoD in fM concentration [12,13]. This increase in sensitivity is secured mainly using nanofibers.…”