The rapid advances in microfabrication and nanofabrication in combination with the synthesis and discovery of new materials have propelled the drive to develop new technological devices such as smartphones, personal and tablet computers. These devices have changed the way humankind interacts and communicates and this change occurred very quickly due in part to decreased production and commercialization costs. As a result, not only nations with powerful economies but also emerging economies and poor countries can get access to these technologies and experience new ways to interact and instantly communicate what is happening around us. Following the advances of all these communication devices as well as those in microfabrication and nanofabrication and the emergence of new materials, technologies such as lab-on-a-chip (LOC) and micro total analysis systems (microTAS) were also boosted, albeit at a slower pace. LOC and microTAS applications have principally been utilized in the biomedical, food and environmental fields. But lately they have also found their place in the synthesis of new chemical compounds and the fabrication of nanostructures. It has become obvious that the LOC and microTAS technologies need to join forces with those behind the new communication devices which provide sources of power, detection and data transmission complementing the features that lab-on-a-chip and microTAS platforms can offer. An increasing number of microfluidic-based devices, developed both in small start-ups and large pharmaceutical and biomedical companies, is being released and entering the market. This chapter offers an overview of the first events in the history of LOC and microTAS devices, the biggest achievements and the challenges that still need to be overcome in order to accelerate the use of this technology.
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Araci IE, Brisk P (2014) Recent developments in microfluidic large scale integration. Curr Opin Biotechnol 25:60–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bassous E, Taub HH, Kuhn L (1977) Ink jet printing nozzle arrays etched in silicon. Appl Phys Lett 31:135–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brock DC (2011) A measure of success. Chem Herit Mag 29(1)Google Scholar
Chin CD, Linder V, Sia SK (2012) Commercialization of microfluidic point-of-care diagnostic devices. Lab Chip 12:2118–2134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Choi K, Ng AHC, Fobel R, Wheeler AR (2012) Digital microfluidics. Ann Rev Anal Chem 5:413–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duffy DC, McDonald C, Schueller OJA, Whitesides GM (1998) Rapid prototyping of microfluidic systems in poly(dimethylsiloxane). Anal Chem 70:4974–4984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gazzaniga V (1999) Uroporphyria: some notes on its ancient historical background. Am J Nephrol 19:159–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gross BC, Erkal JL, Lockwood SY, Chen C, Spence DM (2014) Evaluation of 3D printing and its potential impact on biotechnology and the chemical sciences. Anal Chem 86:3240–3253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison DJ, Flury K, Seiler K, Fan Z, Effenhauser CS, Manz A (1993) Micromachining a miniaturized capillary electrophoresis based chemical analysis system on a chip. Science 261:895–897CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim SM, Lee SH, Suh KY (2008) Cell research with phisically modified microfluidic channels: a review. Lab Chip 8:1015–1023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitson PJ, Rosnes MH, Sans V, Dragone V, Cronin L (2012) Configurable 3D-printed millifluidic and microfluidic “lab on a chip” reactionware devices. Lab Chip 12:3267–3271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kouba E, Wallen E, Pruthi RS (2007) Uroscopy by Hippocrates and Theophilus: prognosis versus diagnosis. J Urol 177:50–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar