Skip to main content

Soft lithography fabrication of index-matched microfluidic devices for reducing artifacts in fluorescence and quantitative phase imaging

Microfluidics and Nanofluidics volume 22, Article number: 2 (2018) Cite this article

Abstract

Microfluidic devices are widely used for biomedical applications based on microscopy or other optical detection methods. However, the materials commonly used for microfabrication typically have a high refractive index relative to water, which can create artifacts at device edges and limit applicability to applications requiring high-precision imaging or morphological feature detection. Here we present a soft lithography method to fabricate microfluidic devices out of MY133-V2000, a UV-curable, fluorinated polymer with low refractive index that is close to that of water (n = 1.33). The primary challenge in the use of this material (and fluorinated materials in general) is the low adhesion of the fluorinated material; we present several alternative fabrication methods we have tested to improve inter-layer adhesion. The close match between the refractive index of this material and aqueous solutions commonly used in biomedical applications enables fluorescence imaging at microchannel or other microfabricated edges without distortion. The close match in refractive index also enables quantitative phase microscopy imaging across the full width of microchannels without error-inducing artifacts for measurement of cell biomass. Overall, our results demonstrate the utility of low-refractive index microfluidics for biological applications requiring high-precision optical imaging.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  • Andersson H, van den Berg A (2003) Microfluidic devices for cellomics: a review. Sensors Actuators B Chem 92:315–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baret JC et al (2009) Fluorescence-activated droplet sorting (FADS): efficient microfluidic cell sorting based on enzymatic activity. Lab Chip 9:1850–1858

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bartolo D, Degre G, Nghe P, Studer V (2008) Microfluidic stickers. Lab Chip 8:274–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bon P, Maucort G, Wattellier B, Monneret S (2009) Quadriwave lateral shearing interferometry for quantitative phase microscopy of living cells. Opt Expr 17(15):13080–13094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bon P, Savatier J, Merlin M, Wattelier B, Monneret S (2012) Optical detection and measurement of living cell morphometric features with single-shot quantitative phase microscopy. J Biomed Opt 17:076004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Budwig R (1994) Refractive index matching methods for liquid flow investigations. Exp Fluids 17:350–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byron ML, Variano EA (2013) Refractive-index-matched hydrogel materials for measuring flow-structure interactions. Exp Fluids 54:1456

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cheng Y-H, Chen Y-C, Brien R, Yoon E (2016) Scaling and automation of a high-throughput single-cell-derived tumor sphere assay chip. Lab Chip 16:3708–3717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Choi JW et al (2002) An integrated microfluidic biochemical detection system for protein analysis with magnetic bead-based sampling capabilities. Lab Chip 2:27–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chun J, Zangle TA, Kolarova T, Finn RS, Teitell MA, Reed J (2012) Rapidly quantifying drug sensitivity of dispersed and clumped breast cancer cells by mass profiling. Analyst 137:5495–5498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung K, Crane MM, Lu H (2008) Automated on-chip rapid microscopy, phenotyping and sorting of C. elegans. Nat Methods 5:637–643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung C-C, Cheng I-F, Lin C-C, Chang H-C (2011a) Rapid quantification of bio-particles based on image visualisation in a dielectrophoretic microfluidic chip. Microfluid Nanofluid 10:311–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung K, Kim Y, Kanodia JS, Gong E, Shvartsman SY, Lu H (2011b) A microfluidic array for large-scale ordering and orientation of embryos. Nat Methods 8:171–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung BG, Lee K-H, Khademhosseini A, Lee S-H (2012) Microfluidic fabrication of microengineered hydrogels and their application in tissue engineering. Lab Chip 12:45–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chung K et al (2013) Structural and molecular interrogation of intact biological systems. Nature 497:332–337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crocker JC, Grier DG (1996) Methods of digital video microscopy for colloidal studies. J Colloids Interface Sci 179:298–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dave FF, Hae Woon C, Burr Z, Jeremy KS, Jeffery JC, Susan VO, Lee LJ (2008) Femtosecond laser micromachining of dielectric materials for biomedical applications. J Micromech Microeng 18:035020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Carlo D, Wu LY, Lee LP (2006) Dynamic single cell culture array. Lab Chip 6:1445–1449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dittrich PS, Manz A (2006) Lab-on-a-chip: microfluidics in drug discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov 5:210–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghiglia DC, Pritt MD (1998) Two-dimensional phase unwrapping: theory, algorithms, and software, vol 4. Wiley, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Giepmans BN, Adams SR, Ellisman MH, Tsien RY (2006) The fluorescent toolbox for assessing protein location and function. Science 312:217–224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Golden AP, Tien J (2007) Fabrication of microfluidic hydrogels using molded gelatin as a sacrificial element. Lab Chip 7:720–725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein RM, Zebker HA, Werner CL (1988) Satellite radar interferometry: two-dimensional phase unwrapping. Radio Sci 23:713–720

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groh W, Zimmermann A (1991) What is the lowest refractive index of an organic polymer? Macromolecules 24:6660–6663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heckele M, Schomburg WK (2004) Review on micro molding of thermoplastic polymers. J Micromech Microeng 14:R1–R14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang S-H, Huang K-S, Liou Y-M (2016) Simultaneous monitoring of oxygen consumption and acidification rates of a single zebrafish embryo during embryonic development within a microfluidic device. Microfluid Nanofluid 21:3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jang J, Bae CY, Park J, Ye JC (2010) Self-reference quantitative phase microscopy for microfluidic devices. Opt Lett 35:514–516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jovic A, Howell B, Takayama S (2009) Timing is everything: using fluidics to understand the role of temporal dynamics in cellular systems. Microfluid Nanofluid 6:717–729

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kandel ME, Teng KW, Selvin PR, Popescu G (2017) Label-free imaging of single microtubule dynamics using spatial light interference microscopy. ACS Nano 11:647–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim DNH, Teitell MA, Reed J, Zangle TA (2015) Hybrid random walk-linear discriminant analysis method for unwrapping quantitative phase microscopy images of biological samples. J Biomed Opt 20:111211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby BJ, Hasselbrink EF (2004) Zeta potential of microfluidic substrates: 1. Theory, experimental techniques, and effects on separations. Electrophoresis 25:187–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lam P, Wynne KJ, Wnek GE (2002) Surface-tension-confined microfluidics. Langmuir 18:948–951

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonard DW, Meek KM (1997) Refractive indices of the collagen fibrils and extrafibrillar material of the corneal stroma. Biophys J 72:1382–1387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lue N, Popescu G (2006) Live cell refractometry using microfluidic devices. Opt Lett 31:2759–2761

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzoccoli JP, Feke DL, Baskaran H, Pintauro PN (2010) Mechanical and cell viability properties of crosslinked low-and high-molecular weight poly (ethylene glycol) diacrylate blends. J Biomed Mater Res A 93:558–566

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald JC, Whitesides GM (2002) Poly(dimethylsiloxane) as a material for fabricating microfluidic devices. Acc Chem Res 35:491–499

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mir M et al (2011) Optical measurement of cycle-dependent cell growth. Proc Natl Acad Sci 108:13124–13129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ntziachristos V (2006) Fluorescence molecular imaging. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 8:1–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunes PS, Ohlsson PD, Ordeig O, Kutter JP (2010) Cyclic olefin polymers: emerging materials for lab-on-a-chip applications. Microfluid Nanofluid 9:145–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paguirigan A, Beebe D (2006) Gelatin based microfluidic devices for cell culture. Lab Chip 6:407–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pérez-Madrigal MM et al (2014) Thermoplastic polyurethane: polythiophene nanomembranes for biomedical and biotechnological applications. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces 6:9719–9732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popescu G, Park K, Mir M, Bashir R (2014) New technologies for measuring single cell mass. Lab Chip 14:646–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quake SR, Scherer A (2000) From micro- to nanofabrication with soft materials. Science 290:1536–1540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed J et al (2011) Rapid, massively parallel single-cell drug response measurements via live cell interferometry. Biophys J 101:1025–1031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sackmann EK, Fulton AL, Beebe DJ (2014) The present and future role of microfluidics in biomedical research. Nature 507:181–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmit J, Creath K, Kujawinska M (1993) Spatial and temporal phase-measurement techniques: a comparison of major error sources in one dimension. Proc SPIE 1755:202–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Søndergaard JN et al (2010) Differential sensitivity of melanoma cell lines with BRAFV600E mutation to the specific Raf inhibitor PLX4032. J Trans Med 8:39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun J, Liu W, Li Y, Gholamipour-Shirazi A, Abdulla A, Ding X (2017) An on-chip cell culturing and combinatorial drug screening system. Microfluid Nanofluid 21:125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thorsen T, Maerkl SJ, Quake SR (2002) Microfluidic large-scale integration. Science 298:580–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valero A, Merino F, Wolbers F, Luttge R, Vermes I, Andersson H, van den Berg A (2005) Apoptotic cell death dynamics of HL60 cells studied using a microfluidic cell trap device. Lab Chip 5:49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vickerman V, Blundo J, Chung S, Kamm R (2008) Design, fabrication and implementation of a novel multi-parameter control microfluidic platform for three-dimensional cell culture and real-time imaging. Lab Chip 8:1468–1477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wabuyele MB, Ford SM, Stryjewski W, Barrow J, Soper SA (2001) Single molecule detection of double-stranded DNA in poly (methylmethacrylate) and polycarbonate microfluidic devices. Electrophoresis 22:3939–3948

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang MM et al (2005) Microfluidic sorting of mammalian cells by optical force switching. Nat Biotechnol 23:83–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weibel DB, Diluzio WR, Whitesides GM (2007) Microfabrication meets microbiology. Nat Rev Microbiol 5:209–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitesides GM (2006) The origins and the future of microfluidics. Nature 442:368–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xia Y, Whitesides GM (1998) Soft lithography. Annu Rev Mater Sci 28:153–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan Z, Huang X, Yang C (2017) Rapid prototyping of single-layer microfluidic PDMS devices with abrupt depth variations under non-clean-room conditions by using laser ablation and UV-curable polymer. Microfluid Nanofluid 21:108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeh C-H, Lin P-W, Lin Y-C (2009) Chitosan microfiber fabrication using a microfluidic chip and its application to cell cultures. Microfluid Nanofluid 8:115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yeo LY, Chang HC, Chan PP, Friend JR (2011) Microfluidic devices for bioapplications. Small 7:12–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zangle TA, Teitell MA (2014) Live-cell mass profiling: an emerging approach in quantitative biophysics. Nat Methods 11:1221–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zangle TA, Mani A, Santiago JG (2009) On the propagation of concentration polarization from microchannel-nanochannel interfaces part II. Numerical and experimental study. Langmuir ACS J Surf Colloids 25:3909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zangle TA, Burnes D, Mathis C, Witte ON, Teitell MA (2013a) Quantifying biomass changes of single CD8 + T cells during antigen specific cytotoxicity. PLoS ONE 8:e68916

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zangle TA, Chun J, Zhang J, Reed J, Teitell MA (2013b) Quantification of biomass and cell motion in human pluripotent stem cell colonies. Biophys J 105:593–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zare RN, Kim S (2010) Microfluidic platforms for single-cell analysis. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 12:187–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Yu-Chun Kung (NantWorks) for assistance in microfabrication and Dr. Ribas’s laboratory (UCLA) for providing cell lines. Mask and primary SU-8 mold fabrication was performed in the UCLA California NanoSystems Institute’s Integrated Systems Nanofabrication Cleanroom with the assistance of cleanroom staff. This work was supported by the UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, the Broad Stem Cell Research Center at UCLA, and the National Institutes of Health (K25CA157940). This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program under Grant No. 114408.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Bioengineering, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Diane N. H. Kim, Carolyn Kim & Michael A. Teitell

  2. Department of Neuroscience, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Kevin T. Kim

  3. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, David Geffen School of Medicine, Broad Stem Cell Research Center, California Nanosystems Institute, and Molecular Biology Institute, UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Michael A. Teitell

  4. Department of Chemical Engineering and Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA

    Thomas A. Zangle

Authors
  1. Diane N. H. Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kevin T. Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Carolyn Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael A. Teitell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Thomas A. Zangle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Thomas A. Zangle.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, D.N.H., Kim, K.T., Kim, C. et al. Soft lithography fabrication of index-matched microfluidic devices for reducing artifacts in fluorescence and quantitative phase imaging. Microfluid Nanofluid 22, 2 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10404-017-2023-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10404-017-2023-3

Keywords

  • Microfluidic device
  • Microfabrication
  • Refractive index
  • Fluorescence imaging
  • Quantitative phase imaging