| Literature DB >> 30857317 |
Holger Bolze1,2, Peer Erfle3,4, Juliane Riewe5,6, Heike Bunjes7,8, Andreas Dietzel9,10, Thomas P Burg11,12.
Abstract
A key aspect of microfluidic processes is their ability to perform chemical reactions in small volumes under continuous flow. However, a continuous process requires stable reagent flow over a prolonged period. This can be challenging in microfluidic systems, as bubbles or particles easily block or alter the flow. Online analysis of the product stream can alleviate this problem by providing a feedback signal. When this signal exceeds a pre-defined range, the process can be re-adjusted or interrupted to prevent contamination. Here we demonstrate the feasibility of this concept by implementing a microfluidic detector downstream of a segmented-flow system for the synthesis of lipid nanoparticles. To match the flow rate through the detector to the measurement bandwidth independent of the synthesis requirements, a small stream is sidelined from the original product stream and routed through a measuring channel with 2 × 2 µm cross-section. The small size of the measuring channel prevents the entry of air plugs, which are inherent to our segmented flow synthesis device. Nanoparticles passing through the small channel were detected and characterized by quantitative fluorescence measurements. With this setup, we were able to count single nanoparticles. This way, we were able to detect changes in the particle synthesis affecting the size, concentration, or velocity of the particles in suspension. We envision that the flow-splitting scheme demonstrated here can be transferred to detection methods other than fluorescence for continuous monitoring and feedback control of microfluidic nanoparticle synthesis.Entities:
Keywords: fluorescence; lipid nanoparticles; microfluidics; nanoparticle characterization; online analysis; plug flow mixer; precipitation; single particle analysis
Year: 2019 PMID: 30857317 PMCID: PMC6470898 DOI: 10.3390/mi10030179
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Micromachines (Basel) ISSN: 2072-666X Impact factor: 2.891
Figure 1Flowchart and structure of the online analysis setup.
Figure 2(a) Particles per minute measured with the microfluidic detector (red and green) and concentration of lipid nanoparticles in the collected product stream measured by the NanoSight system (blue). Error bars represent the standard errors of the respective measurement techniques. (b) Correlation of the microfluidic measured particles per minute and concentration.
Figure 3(a) Histograms of the fluorescence intensity of different experiments. (b) Histograms of the reciprocal residence time of different experiments. (c) Heatmap for all particles of a 1419 μm plug experiment to detect correlations between fluorescence intensity and residence time (colored areas in (a) and (b) represent the variance of three to four repeated experiments under the same conditions).
Figure 4Comparison of qualitative histograms of the third root of fluorescence intensity and particle diameter at different precipitation conditions. The Poisson errors for the microfluidic detector were below a reasonable graphic expression in this context. (a) 812 μm plug size. (b) 529 μm plug size. (c) 386 μm plug size.
Figure 5Detected perturbations of the online synthesis. Colored areas represent the standard error of the average value for 15 s measurement frames. (a) No incidents. (b) Drifting change. (c) Incident in synthesis. (d) Clogging.