Table 1 A comparison of typical cell patterning methods
Ref. No. | Strategy design | Throughputa | Cell capture/patterning | Control of multicell alignment | Control of cell spreading | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Microwell (single small well) | 1800 wells/mm2 | Single cell: 92% | No | No | Easy operation and high throughput; Influence on cell spreading and limitation to only short-term study | |
Microwell (combination of small and large wells) | ~ 5.7 wells/mm2 | Single cell: 77% | No | Yes | Feasibility for long-term study; Labor-intensive/time-consuming operation and low throughput | |
Microwell + Micropattern | ~25 patterns/mm2 | Single cell: 73.7 ± 8.1% | No | Yes | Feasibility for long-term study; Labor-intensive/time-consuming operation and low throughput | |
Micropattern (composite protein micropatterns via microcontact printing) | ~240 patterns/mm2 | Single-cell: 36.5 ± 3.3% Double-cell: 32.1 ± 1.9% Triple-cell: 24.2 ± 2.8% | Yes | Yes | Easy operation; Low overall efficiency of cell capture/alignment and adhesion/spreading | |
Micropattern (protein micropatterns via inkjet printing) | ~1 pattern/6.5 mm2 | Cell group | No | Yes | Low cost and easy operation; Limitation to large feature size and unsuitability for single-cell patterning | |
Micropattern (protein micropatterns via UV controlled crosslinking) | ~6 patterns/mm2 | Cell group | No | No | Easy operation and strong stability; Limitation to large feature size and unsuitability for single-cell patterning | |
Micropattern (protein micropatterns via electrochemically induced selective absorption) | ~3 patterns/mm | Cell group | No | Yes | Easy operation; Limitation to large feature size and unsuitability for single-cell patterning | |
Micropattern (protein micropatterns via electrochemically induced selective absorption) | ~7 patterns/mm | Cell group | No | Yes | Easy operation; Limitation to large feature size and unsuitability for single-cell patterning | |
Micropattern (protein micropatterns via solid lift-off) | ~210 patterns/mm2 | Single cell: ~30%b | No | No | Easy operation, high throughput and feasibility of single-cell patterning; Challenging trade off of single-cell capture efficiency and spreading requirement | |
Micropattern (protein micropatterns via solid lift-off) | ~500 patterns/mm2 | Single cell: 53% | No | No | Easy operation, high throughput and feasibility of single-cell patterning; Challenging trade off of single-cell capture efficiency and spreading requirement | |
Micropattern (protein micropatterns via solid lift-off) | ~25 patterns/mm2 | Cell group | No | No | Easy operation; Limitation to large feature size and unsuitability for single-cell patterning | |
This study | Solid lift-off (simultaneous control of protein micropatterns generation and cell alignment/adhesion/spreading) | ~320 patterns/mm2 | Single-cell: 86.2 ± 3.2% Double-cell: 56.7 ± 9.4% Triple-cell: 51.1 ± 4.0% | Yes | Yes | Easy operation, high throughput, high overall cell patterning efficiencies, supports for long-term functional study; high cost of shadow mask fabrication |
