Explore the vast range of titles available.

One of the most popular methods to fabricate biomedical microfluidic devices is by using a soft-lithography technique. However, the fabrication of the moulds to produce microfluidic devices, such as SU-8 moulds, usually requires a cleanroom environment that can be quite costly. Therefore, many efforts have been made to develop low-cost alternatives for the fabrication of microstructures, avoiding the use of cleanroom facilities. Recently, low-cost techniques without cleanroom facilities that feature aspect ratios more than 20, for fabricating those SU-8 moulds have been gaining popularity among biomedical research community. In those techniques, Ultraviolet (UV) exposure equipment, commonly used in the Printed Circuit Board (PCB) industry, replaces the more expensive and less available Mask Aligner that has been used in the last 15 years for SU-8 patterning. Alternatively, non-lithographic low-cost techniques, due to their ability for large-scale production, have increased the interest of the industrial and research community to develop simple, rapid and low-cost microfluidic structures. These alternative techniques include Print and Peel methods (PAP), laserjet, solid ink, cutting plotters or micromilling, that use equipment available in almost all laboratories and offices. An example is the xurography technique that uses a cutting plotter machine and adhesive vinyl films to generate the master moulds to fabricate microfluidic channels. In this review, we present a selection of the most recent lithographic and non-lithographic low-cost techniques to fabricate microfluidic structures, focused on the features and limitations of each technique. Only microfabrication methods that do not require the use of cleanrooms are considered. Additionally, potential applications of these microfluidic devices in biomedical engineering are presented with some illustrative examples.

One of the most popular methods to fabricate biomedical microfluidic devices is by using a soft lithography technique. However, the fabrication of the moulds to produce microfluidic devices, such as SU-8 moulds, usually requires a cleanroom environment that can be quite costly. Therefore, many efforts have been made to develop low-cost alternatives for the fabrication of microstructures, avoiding the use of cleanroom facilities. Recently, low-cost techniques without cleanroom facilities that feature aspect ratios more than 20, for fabricating those SU-8 moulds have been gaining popularity among biomedical research community. In those techniques, Ultraviolet (UV) exposure equipment, commonly used in the Printed Circuit Board (PCB) industry, replaces the more expensive and less available Mask Aligner that has been used in the last 15 years for SU-8 patterning. Alternatively, non-lithographic low-cost techniques, due to their ability for large-scale production, have increased the interest of the industrial and research community to develop simple, rapid and low-cost microfluidic structures. These alternative techniques include Print and Peel methods (PAP), laserjet, solid ink, cutting plotters or micromilling, that use equipment available in almost all laboratories and offices. An example is the xurography technique that uses a cutting plotter machine and adhesive vinyl films to generate the master moulds to fabricate microfluidic channels. In this review, we present a selection of the most recent lithographic and non lithographic low-cost techniques to fabricate microfluidic structures, focused on the features and limitations of each technique. Only microfabrication methods that do not require the use of cleanrooms are considered. Additionally, potential applications of these microfluidic devices in biomedical engineering are presented with some illustrative examples.

Microfluidic devices are electrical/mechanical systems that offer the ability to work with minimal sample volumes, short reactions times, and have the possibility to perform massive parallel operations. An important application of microfluidics is blood rheology in microdevices, which has played a key role in recent developments of lab-on-chip devices for blood sampling and analysis. The most popular and traditional method to fabricate these types of devices is the polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) soft lithography technique, which requires molds, usually produced by photolithography. Although the research results are extremely encouraging, the high costs and time involved in the production of molds by photolithography is currently slowing down the development cycle of these types of devices. Here we present a simple, rapid, and low-cost nonlithographic technique to create microfluidic systems for biomedical applications. The results demonstrate the ability of the proposed method to perform cell free layer (CFL) measurements and the formation of microbubbles in continuous blood flow.

Microfluidic devices are electrical/mechanical systems that offer the ability to work with minimal sample volumes, short reactions times, and have the possibility to perform massive parallel operations. An important application of microfluidics is blood rheology in microdevices, which has played a key role in recent developments of lab-on-chip devices for blood sampling and analysis. The most popular and traditional method to fabricate these types of devices is the polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) soft lithography technique, which requires molds, usually produced by photolithography. Although the research results are extremely encouraging, the high costs and time involved in the production of molds by photolithography is currently slowing down the development cycle of these types of devices. Here we present a simple, rapid, and low-cost nonlithographic technique to create microfluidic systems for biomedical applications. The results demonstrate the ability of the proposed method to perform cell free layer (CFL) measurements and the formation of microbubbles in continuous blood flow.