| Literature DB >> 35473316 |
Avinash Kumar1, Arpana Parihar2, Udwesh Panda1, Dipesh Singh Parihar3.
Abstract
Recent advances in microfluidics-based point-of-care testing (POCT) technology such as paper, array, and beads have shown promising results for diagnosing various infectious diseases. The fast and timely detection of viral infection has proven to be a critical step for deciding the therapeutic outcome in the current COVID-19 pandemic, which in turn not only enhances the patient survival rate but also reduces the disease-associated comorbidities. In the present scenario, rapid, noninvasive detection of the virus using low cost and high throughput microfluidics-based POCT devices embraces the advantages over existing diagnostic technologies, for which a centralized lab facility, expensive instruments, sample pretreatment, and skilled personnel are required. Microfluidic-based multiplexed POCT devices can be a boon for clinical diagnosis in developing countries that lacks a centralized health care system and resources. The microfluidic devices can be used for disease diagnosis and exploited for the development and testing of drug efficacy for disease treatment in model systems. The havoc created by the second wave of COVID-19 led several countries' governments to the back front. The lack of diagnostic kits, medical devices, and human resources created a huge demand for a technology that can be remotely operated with single touch and data that can be analyzed on a phone. Recent advancements in information technology and the use of smartphones led to a paradigm shift in the development of diagnostic devices, which can be explored to deal with the current pandemic situation. This review sheds light on various approaches for the development of cost-effective microfluidics POCT devices. The successfully used microfluidic devices for COVID-19 detection under clinical settings along with their pros and cons have been discussed here. Further, the integration of microfluidic devices with smartphones and wireless network systems using the Internet-of-things will enable readers for manufacturing advanced POCT devices for remote disease management in low resource settings.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; detection; diagnostics; infectious disease; microfluidics; point-of-care testing
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35473316 PMCID: PMC9063993 DOI: 10.1021/acsabm.1c01320
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Appl Bio Mater ISSN: 2576-6422
Figure 1Diagnostic tests and methodologies for detection of SARS-CoV-2.
Comparison between COVID-19 First, Second, and Third Waves
| waves | time | measures for precaution | symptoms | rate of mortality | effect on economy | social activities | vaccine | reinfection | mutations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1st wave | March 2020 | very high | fever, chest pain, headache, anosmia, sore throat | very high | completely stopped | banned | none | none | none |
| 2nd wave | July 2020 | mandatory | cold and fever, pneumonia, dyspnoea | increased | affected | decreased | research | appeared | none |
| 3rd wave | Christmas 2021 | people neglected | flu-like symptoms, psychological effect | comparatively lower | less affected | normal | available | common | new variants emerged |
Figure 2Most commonly used diagnostics for SARS-CoV-2. Reproduced with permission from ref (34). Copyright 2021 Elsevier.
Methodologies for Detection of SARS-CoV-2 along with Advantage
| approaches | test | advantage | sample type |
|---|---|---|---|
| serological | chemiluminescence immunoassay (CLIA) | sensitive and rapid | blood serum or plasma |
| COVID antigen assay | rapid | ||
| enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) | rapid | ||
| molecular | nucleic acid hybridization using microarray | sensitive | upper respiratory specimens |
| amplicon-based metagenomic sequencing | different coronavirus strains have been identified | ||
| RT-PCR | gold standard test and sensitive | ||
| RT-LAMP | there is no need for a thermal cycler, effective use of time it is not necessary to have access to a high-tech laboratory | ||
| POCT and nanotechnology | biosensors | sensitive, rapid and easy to use | upper respiratory specimens, as well as blood or urine |
| lateral flow assays | specificity is quite high, quick and simple, straightforward to use as there is no need for a laboratory | blood or urine |
POCT Devices Based on Nucleic Acid Detection of SARS-CoV-2
| based on nucleic
acid | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| device | POCT test | duration | sample type | company | positive/negative agreement | ref |
| Biomeme SARS-CoV-2 real-time RT-PCR test | real-time PCR | 1 h | NPS/NS/OS/NPW-/NA/aspirate | Biomeme, Inc. | 97.46%/98.51% | ( |
| Xpert Xpress SARS-CoV-2 test | real-time PCR | 45 min | NPS/NW/aspirate | Cepheid | 100%/100% | ( |
| ePlex respiratory pathogen panel 2 | eSensor technology | 2 h | NPS | GenMark Diagnostics, Inc. | 99.02%/98.41% | ( |
| automatic integrated gene detection system | real-time PCR | 1.5 h | OS/ALF/sputum-/stool | Lifereal Biotechnology Co., Ltd. | 97.62%/100% | ( |
| ARIES SARS-CoV-2 assay | real-time PCR | 2 h | NPS | Luminex Corporation | 100%/100% | ( |
| LamPORE assay | nanopore sequencing combined with LAMP | 2 h | NS/NPS/OS | Oxford Nanopore Technologies | 99.1%/99.6% | ( |
| Sherlock CRISPR SARS-CoV-2 kit | RT-LAMP and CRISPR | 1 h | NS/NPS/OS/NPW/aspirate/NA/BLF | Sherlock BioSciences, Inc. | 97%/100% | ( |
| automatic CPA nucleic acid analyzer | CPA | 55 min | OS/sputum | Ustar Biotechnologies (Hangzhou) Ltd. | 98%/95.4% | ( |
POCT Devices Based on Serological Estimation of Antibody for Diagnosis of COVID-19
| based on
immunoassay | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| device | POCT test | biomarker | duration | sample type | company | positive/negative agreement | ref |
| BinaxNOW COVID-19 Ag Card | lateral flow | antigen | 15 min | NS | Abbott Diagnostics Scarborough, Inc. | 91.7%/100% | ( |
| WANTAI SARS-CoV-2Ab Rapid Test | lateral flow (colloidal gold) | total antibody | 15 min | serum/plasma (dipotassium EDTA, lithium heparin, and sodium citrate)/VWB | Beijing Wantai Biological Pharmacy Enterprise Co., Ltd. | 100%/98.8% | ( |
| Sofia SARS Antigen FIA | lateral flow immunofluorescent sandwich assay | antigen | 15 min | NPS/NS | Quidel Corporation | 96.7%/100% | ( |
| Novel Coronavirus 2019-nCoV Antibody Test | lateral flow, (up-converting phosphor immunochromatographic) | IgM and IgG antibody | 15 min | serum/plasma | Beijing hot view Biotechnology Co., Ltd. | ( | |
| LumiraDx SARS-CoV-2Ag Test | microfluidic immunofluorescence assay | antigen | 12 min | NS | LumiraDx UK Ltd. | 97.6%/96.6% | ( |
| xMAP SARS-CoV-2 Multi-Antigen IgG Assay | 96 plate (multiplexed microsphere-based assay) | IgG antibody | Less than 3 h | serum/dipotassium EDTA plasma | Luminex Corporation | 96.3%/99.3% | ( |
| BioCheck SARS-CoV-2 IgG and IgM combo test | chemiluminescence | IgM and IgG antibody | 30 min | serum | BioCheck, Inc. | 99.1%/97.2% | ( |
| Ellume COVID-19 HomeTest | lateral flow (fluorophore) | antigen | 15 min | NS | Ellume Limited | 95%/97% | ( |
Figure 3Detection of SARS-CoV-2 using high throughput microfluidic nano immunoassay. (A) The design of a microfluidic chip consists of 1024 unit cells. (B) Illustration showing the experimental process. (C) Process of sandwich immunoassay on the chip. (D) Fluorescence response of antihuman IgG-PE for the anti-spike antibodies in human serum. (E) Image showing LOD (dashed) and concentration of antihuman IgG-PE against anti-spike IgG. (F) Comparing parameters between high throughput nano immunoassay and the conventional ELISA technique. (G) Easy, fascinating NIA-based diagnosis process. (H) Spotting plate. (I) Micro arraying. (J) Nano immunoassay. Reproduced with permission from ref (116). Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0).
Figure 5(A) Illustration of microfluidics integrated with other techniques for the detection of SARS-CoV-2 Reproduced with permission from ref (129). Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0). (B) IFAST RT-LAMP device with (1) chamber for sample (2–8) chamber for detection (9) through gates. Reproduced with permission from ref (129). Copyright 2021 Elsevier. (C) IFAST RT-LAMP fabricated microfluidic device for detection of SARS-CoV-2. Optical-based detection techniques for detection of respiratory viruses. Reproduced with permission from ref (130). Copyright 2021 Elsevier. (D) Absorbance and transmittance-based technique. (E) Fluorescent based technique. (F) Paper-based microfluidic device for colorimetric detection. Reproduced with permission from ref (131). Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0).
Figure 4(A) Workflow used for the SARS-CoV-2 detection. (B) Microfluidic diagnostic cartridge was used for SARS-CoV-2 detection. (C) Disposable microfluidic cartridge. (D) 3-D scans of the microfluidic cartridge top and bottom focused image of the diagnostic and amplification region. (E) Labeled image of the smartphone coupled instrument showing components in a magnified view. (F) Fluorescence images of the results of positive and negative SARS-CoV-2 analysis on the real-time RT-LAMP at the diagnostic and amplification chip. (G) ROC curves showing sensitivity and specificity were analyzed for positive samples against the negative samples. Reproduced with permission from ref (108). Creative Commons License (CC BY 4.0).
Microfluidic Devices for Detection of COVID-19
| material | microfluidic device | detection target | duration | sample type | selection | ref |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| gold@Fe3O4 nanocomposite | electrochemical sensor | nucleic acid | artificial and clinical RNA samples | against SARS-CoV-2, MERS-CoV, HCoV-OC43 | ( | |
| gold nanoislands | plasmonics and photothermal effect | nucleic acid | synthesized samples | against SARS-CoV-2 | ( | |
| gold nanoparticles | paper-based electrochemical sensor | nucleic acid | <5 min | COVID-19 positive patients | against MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA | ( |
| graphene sheet | field-effect transistor | spike (S) protein | real-time electrical response | clinical sample for COVID-19patients | ( | |
| gold nanoparticles | surface plasmon resonance and colorimetric assay | nucleic acid | 10 min | isolated RNA | against MERS-CoV viral RNA | ( |
Figure 6Application areas of microfluidics devices.
Some Microfluidic Device Types with Their Advantage and Disadvantage in Detecting Biomolecules
| type of device | advantages | disadvantages | ref |
|---|---|---|---|
| PDMS | highly sensitive can be controlled easily, less cost, need a little amount of sample, high efficacy | need special education and equipment for use, presently no medical centers are using this | ( |
| Chip | easy to use, fast output, demands little amount of small amount of sample, easily detectable, manufactured easily | need a special instrument, more costly | ( |
| μPAD | simple to use, cheapest device, faster outputs, easy storage, and disposal, needs a little sample | it has a poor detection limit, must be in a research setting only, needs a nonambient environment | ( |
| LFSA | simple to use at home or in the medical center, cost-effective, faster outputs | it has a poor detection limit, must be in a research setting only | ( |