| Literature DB >> 29329274 |
Il-Hoon Cho1, Jongsung Lee2, Jiyeon Kim3, Min-Soo Kang4, Jean Kyung Paik5, Seockmo Ku6, Hyun-Mo Cho7, Joseph Irudayaraj8, Dong-Hyung Kim9.
Abstract
An electrochemical immunosensor employs antibodies as capture and detection means to produce electrical charges for the quantitative analysis of target molecules. This sensor type can be utilized as a miniaturized device for the detection of point-of-care testing (POCT). Achieving high-performance analysis regarding sensitivity has been one of the key issues with developing this type of biosensor system. Many modern nanotechnology efforts allowed for the development of innovative electrochemical biosensors with high sensitivity by employing various nanomaterials that facilitate the electron transfer and carrying capacity of signal tracers in combination with surface modification and bioconjugation techniques. In this review, we introduce novel nanomaterials (e.g., carbon nanotube, graphene, indium tin oxide, nanowire and metallic nanoparticles) in order to construct a high-performance electrode. Also, we describe how to increase the number of signal tracers by employing nanomaterials as carriers and making the polymeric enzyme complex associated with redox cycling for signal amplification. The pros and cons of each method are considered throughout this review. We expect that these reviewed strategies for signal enhancement will be applied to the next versions of lateral-flow paper chromatography and microfluidic immunosensor, which are considered the most practical POCT biosensor platforms.Entities:
Keywords: electrochemical immunosensor; electrode scaffold; labeling techniques; nanomaterials; point-of-care testing; signal amplification
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29329274 PMCID: PMC5796447 DOI: 10.3390/s18010207
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Basic analytical principle of electrochemical immunosensor.
Figure 2Nanomaterials used as electrodes or supporting solid matrices to enhance the analytical performance of electrochemical immunosensing.
Summary of representative nanomaterials used as electrode scaffolds for signal enhancement. Abbreviation: Single-wall carbon nanotube (SWCNT); Multi-wall carbon nanotube (MWCNT); Indium tin oxide (ITO); Nanowire field effect transistors (NWFETs); cardiac troponin I (cTnI).
| Materials | Examples | Advantages | Limitations | Limit of Detection | Linear Range | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SWCNT | Large surface area to volume ratio (S/V) | Difficult manipulation during sensor fabrication process | hCG (2.4 pg/mL) | 10–2000 pg/mL | [ | |
| MWCNT | Excellent conducting and electro-catalytic properties | Need to functionalize surface for increasing biocompatibility | PSA (3.33 fg/mL) | 10 fg/mL–100 ng/mL | [ | |
| Graphene | High S/V | Hard to dissolve in water | CEA (0.10 pg/mL) | 0.01 pg/mL–1.0 ng/mL | [ | |
| Low cost/High | Slow kinetics of electron-transfer upon coating surface with antibodies | RACK1 (30 fg/mL) | 14.25–712.5 fg/mL | [ | ||
| Metal | Rapid response, electro-catalytic capability and reproducibility | Decrease in electrostatic potential with distance | IgG (4 pg/mL) | 0.01–200 ng/mL | [ | |
| Metal oxides | Facilitation of electron-transfer kinetics | The same as above | No linear range can be found | [ | ||
| Semi-conductor | Ultrasensitive/Real-time | The same as above | cTnI (5 pg/mL) | 5–200 pg/mL | [ | |
| Conducting polymers | Maintenance of conductance under neutral pH | The same as above | AFP (7 fg/mL) | 0.01 pg/mL–1.0 ng/mL | [ | |
| Au, Ag, composites | Efficient electron | Electrical instability in high salt concentration | Atrazine (16 pg/mL) | 0.05–0.5 ng/mL | [ |
Figure 3Schematic representation of labeling approaches for the signal amplification of electrochemical immunosensor. The labeling techniques can be categorized as (a) nanocarrier, (b) electroactive nanotracer, (c) enzyme-based nanopolymer and (d) redox cycling of enzyme reactions, which enable an electrochemical signal enhancement.
Summary of labeling strategies associated with nanomaterials for signal enhancement. Abbreviation: Mesoporous silica nanoparticle (MSN); Graphene oxide (GO); Alkaline phosphatase (ALP); Prostate-specific antigen (PSA); Apyrimidinic endonuclease (APE); Human chorionic gonadotropin (hcG); Carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA); Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP).
| Strategies | Example | Effects | Limit of Detection | Linear Range | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSN | Encapsulation of electron mediator | PSA (0.31 pg/mL) | 0.001–5.0 ng/mL | [ | |
| GO | High loading capacity of ALP | Human apurinic/APE 1 | 0.1–80 pg/mL | [ | |
| Colloidal gold | Redox properties in acidic condition | hCG (5 pg/mL) | 0–500 pg/mL | [ | |
| Nanogold | Superior catalytic activity to colloidal gold | CEA (24 fg/mL) | 0.05 pg/mL–1.0 ng/mL | [ | |
| Silver nanoparticle | Production of sharper peak compared to gold nanoparticle | 0.2–500 nM | [ | ||
| Bimetallic nanostructures | Enhanced catalytic capability Excellent adsorption and charge transfer trait | 5 pg/mL–100 ng/mL | [ | ||
| Antibody-enzyme network structure | Increasing the number of enzyme molecules | AFP (2 pg/mL) | 5–200 pg/mL | [ | |
| Facilitation by electron mediators | Converting the oxidized state of signal species with reducing agents | CEA (sub pg/mL) | 1.0 pg/mL–0.1 μg/mL | [ |