Advertisement

BioChip Journal

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 146–153 | Cite as

Fabrication of Microfluidic Chip for Investigation of Wound Healing Processes

  • Hani Go
  • Tian Tian
  • Seog Woo Rhee
Original Article
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

This work describes a microfludic cell culture device embedded with microstructured posts fabricated by a photolithography technique and a replica-molding technique. BALB/3T3 fibroblast cells were cultured inside the PDMS microfludic chip to form a confluent state, and an external pressure was applied to the top part of the microfluidic chip to remove the cells from the contact areas of the posts. The applied pressure was removed after the formation of wound areas in the cell layer, and the wound healing processes were investigated by monitoring the migration and proliferation of BALB/3T3 fibroblast cells. The function of the microfluidic chip actuated by an applied pressure was investigated by a fluorescent material, and the formation of the wound areas by an applied pressure was investigated by optical microscopy. After the formation of the wound in the cell layer, optical microscopic images of the cells at the same positions were captured by an optical microscope at intervals of 12 h in order to monitor the wound healing processes by migration and proliferation of the cells. Finally, the wound healing was quantitatively assessed by plotting a growth curve. In conclusion, because the microfluidic device developed in this work is very simple and easy to use, the device might be applicable to assessing the wound healing processes and monitoring the migration and proliferation of other cells.

Keywords

Microfludic device Fibroblast cells Wound healing Migration Proliferation 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lamalice, L., Le Boeuf, F. & Huot, J. Endothelial cell migration during angiogenesis. Circ. Res. 100, 782–794 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chung, S., Sudo, R., Vickerman, V., Zervantonakis, I.K. & Kamm, R.D. Microfluidic platforms for studies of angiogenesis, cell migration, and cell-cell interactions. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 38, 1164–1177 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reig, G., Pulgar, E. & Concha, M.L. Cell migration: from tissue culture to embryos. Development 141, 1999–2013 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Broughton, G. II, Janis, J.E. & Attinger, C.E. Wound healing: an Overview. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. 117, 1e–S–32–eS (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nauta, A., Gurtner, G.C. & Longaker, M.T. Wound healing and regenerative strategies. Oral Dis. 17, 541–549 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Martin, P. & Nunan, R. Catellular and molecular mechanisms of repair in acute and chronic wound healing. Br. J. Dermatol. 173, 370–378 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Friedl, P. & Wolf, K. Tumour-cell invasion and migration: diversity and escape mechanisms. Nat. Rev. Cancer 3, 362–374 (2003).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Valastyan, S. & Weinberg, R.A. Tumor metastasis: molecular insights and evolving paradigms. Cell 147, 275–292 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boyden, S. The chemotactic effect of mixtures of antibody and antigen on polymorphonuclear leucocytes. J. Exp. Med. 115, 453–466 (1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zigmond, S.H. Oatrientation chamber in chemotaxis. Methods Enzymol. 162, 65–72 (1988).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zicha, D., Dunn, G.A. & Brown, A.F. A new directviewing chemotaxis chamber. J. Cell. Sci. 99, 769–775 (1991).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kramer, N. et al. In vitro cell migration and invasion assays. Mut. Res. 752, 10–24 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schwarz, J. et al. A microfluidic device for measuring cell migration towards substrate-bound and soluble chemokine gradients. Sci. Rep. 6, 36440 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jeon, N.L. et al. Neutrophil chemotaxis in linear and complex gradients of interleukin-8 formed in a microfabricated device. Nat. Biotech. 20, 826–830 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Moraes, C., Mehta, G., Lesher-Perez, S.C. & Takayama, S. Oatrgans-on-a-chip: a focus on compartmentalized microdevices. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 40, 1211–1227 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chen, Y.-C. et al. Single-cell migration chip for chemotaxis-based microfluidic selection of heterogeneous cell populations. Sci. Rep. 5, 9980 (2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Velve-Casquillas, G., Le Berre, M., Piel, M. & Tran, P.T. Microfluidic tools for cell biological research. Nano Today 5, 28–47 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Riahi, R., Yang, Y., Zhang, D.D. & Wong, P.K. Advances in wound-healing assays for probing collective cell migration. J. Lab. Autom. 17, 59–65 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Nie, F.-Q. et al. On-chip cell migration assay using microfluidic channels. Biomaterials 28, 4017–4022 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zhang, M., Li, H., Ma, H. & Qin, J. A simple microfluidic strategy for cell migration assay in an in vitro wound-healing model. Wound Rep. Reg. 21, 897–903 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Gao, A.X., Tian, T.L., Shi, Z.Z. & Yu, L. A Cost-effective microdevice bridges microfluidic and conventional in vitro scratch/wound-healing assay for personalized therapy validation. BioChip J. 10, 56–64 (2016).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Korean BioChip Society and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ChemistryKongju National UniversityKongjuRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations