| Literature DB >> 27669320 |
Christopher R Phaneuf1, Betty Mangadu2, Matthew E Piccini3,4, Anup K Singh5, Chung-Yan Koh6.
Abstract
Enteric and diarrheal diseases are a major cause of childhood illness and death in countries with developing economies. Each year, more than half of a million children under the age of five die from these diseases. We have developed a portable, microfluidic platform capable of simultaneous, multiplexed detection of several of the bacterial pathogens that cause these diseases. This platform can perform fast, sensitive immunoassays directly from relevant, complex clinical matrices such as stool without extensive sample cleanup or preparation. Using only 1 µL of sample per assay, we demonstrate simultaneous multiplexed detection of four bacterial pathogens implicated in diarrheal and enteric diseases in less than 20 min.Entities:
Keywords: centrifugal; diagnostics; enteric diseases; immunoassay; microfluidics; pathogen detection; point-of-care
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27669320 PMCID: PMC5192369 DOI: 10.3390/bios6040049
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosensors (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6374
Figure 1(a) The microfluidic platform is shown (left) performing epifluorescence detection (note: the lid is closed when in actual use). The principles of the sedimentation-based immunoassay (right) illustrate the ability to concentrate a bead-bound analyte while excluding contaminants; (b) The 20-channel microfluidic disc is made from lasercut PMMA and PSA layers. The close-up illustrates the channel architecture and the appearance of a used disc with the concentrated pellet of beads shown at the tip of each channel.
Figure 2Multiplexed detection of E. coli, Listeria, Salmonella, and Shigella from a stool sample. Each target pathogen was detected in the presence of a background pool of the other non-targeted pathogen to demonstrate specificity and selectivity.
Figure 3The sensitivity of our detection was demonstrated with three disc runs for a range of cell counts for all bacterial targets: (a) E. coli; (b) Listeria; (c) Salmonella; and (d) Shigella. These samples were run in assay buffer.
The limit of detection was determined for the full panel of bacteria in a variety of sample matrices, including assay buffer, urine, blood, and stool. Singleplex detections were performed for all matrices and multiplex detections were confined to assay buffer and stool. Conventional ELISA detections in assay buffer are also shown for comparison.
| LOD (# of Cells) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Buffer | Urine | Blood | Stool | Buffer | Stool | Buffer | |
| 11 | 34 | 33 | 9 | 51 | 31 | 38 | |
| 999 | 796 | 1668 | 320 | 2849 | 238 | 1745 | |
| 2416 | 703 | 1200 | 974 | 1154 | 328 | 2648 | |
| 53 | 33 | 61 | 20 | 94 | 12 | 1236 | |
Figure 4The ability to work with clinical samples without extensive sample preparation was demonstrated with the detection of E. coli in a variety of complex sample matrices: (a) buffer; (b) urine; (c) blood; and (d) mouse stool.
Figure 5Method comparisons of the microfluidic platform to conventional ELISA detections were performed in assay buffer for (a) E. coli; (b) Listeria; (c) Salmonella; and (d) Shigella. The two methods are shown to correlate closely with neither method significantly under- or over-estimating the number of bacteria.