Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Clamping strategies for organ-on-a-chip devices

Nature Reviews Materials volume 8, pages 147–164 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Organ-on-a-chip devices have enabled major breakthroughs in biomedical research, but they have yet to be successfully translated to the pharmaceutical industry. Traditional microfluidic devices rely on irreversible bonding techniques to seal fluidic channels, which limit their accessibility and automation and can be labour-intensive to operate. New and more versatile chip designs are urgently needed to enable industrial applications and to support complex, 3D cell cultures. Clamps allow microdevices to be opened and closed before, after and during operation, such that cells can be directly accessed whenever needed. This versatility facilitates the incorporation of more physiologically relevant 3D in vitro models, including organoids, and allows a wider range of on-chip and off-chip biochemical assays. This Review describes the current trend from irreversible chip bonding to innovative, reversible fastening techniques. We introduce the concept of Lock-and-Play devices as emerging tools that can provide a leak-tight seal in a single step for high-throughput applications. Finally, we analyse the applications in which Lock-and-Play devices are likely to have the biggest impact for the drug development industry.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it

$39.95

Learn more

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Irreversible and reversible sealing strategies for organ-on-a-chip design.
Fig. 2: Clamping strategies to create reversibly sealed organ-on-a-chip devices.
Fig. 3: Examples of Lock-and-Play strategies.
Fig. 4: Culture of 3D biological models using clamping devices.
Fig. 5: Clamping strategies to decrease the use of elastomer-based gaskets.
Fig. 6: A roadmap towards the development of next-generation clamping devices.

References

  1. DiMasi, J. A., Grabowski, H. G. & Hansen, R. W. Innovation in the pharmaceutical industry: new estimates of R&D costs. J. Health Econ. 47, 20–33 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mullard, A. Parsing clinical success rates. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 15, 447 (2016).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Skardal, A., Aleman, J., Forsythe, S., Rajan, S. & Murphy, S. Drug compound screening in single and integrated multi-organoid body- on-a-chip systems. Biofabrication 12, 025017 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Skardal, A. et al. Multi-tissue interactions in an integrated three-tissue organ-on-a-chip platform. Sci. Rep. 7, 8837 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mcaleer, C. W. et al. Multi-organ system for the evaluation of efficacy and off-target toxicity of anticancer therapeutics. Sci. Transl. Med. 11, eaav1386 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Zhang, B. & Radisic, M. Organ-on-A-chip devices advance to market. Lab Chip 17, 2395–2420 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. QY Research. Global Organ-On-Chip Market Insights, Forecast to 2025 (QY Research, 2019).

  8. Franzen, N. et al. Impact of organ-on-a-chip technology on pharmaceutical R&D costs. Drug Discov. Today 24, 1720–1724 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Willyard, C. Channeling chip power: Tissue chips are being put to the test by industry. Nat. Med. 23, 138–140 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Horejs, C. Organ chips, organoids and the animal testing conundrum. Nat. Rev. Mater. 6, 372–373 (2021).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Low, L. A., Mummery, C., Berridge, B. R., Austin, C. P. & Tagle, D. A. Organs-on-chips: into the next decade. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 20, 345–361 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Schuster, B. et al. Automated microfluidic platform for dynamic and combinatorial drug screening of tumor organoids. Nat. Commun. 11, 5271 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Abhyankar, V. V., Wu, M., Koh, C.-Y. & Hatch, A. V. A reversibly sealed, easy access, modular (SEAM) microfluidic architecture to establish in vitro tissue interfaces. PLoS ONE 11, e0156341 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ma, L. D. et al. Design and fabrication of a liver-on-a-chip platform for convenient, highly efficient, and safe: in situ perfusion culture of 3D hepatic spheroids. Lab Chip 18, 2547–2562 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Anwar, K., Han, T. & Kim, S. M. Sensors and Actuators B : Chemical Reversible sealing techniques for microdevice applications. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 153, 301–311 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Herland, A. et al. Quantitative prediction of human pharmacokinetic responses to drugs via fluidically coupled vascularized organ chips. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4, 421–436 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Huh, D. et al. Reconstituting organ-level lung functions on a chip. Science 328, 1662–1668 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Park, T. E. et al. Hypoxia-enhanced Blood-Brain Barrier Chip recapitulates human barrier function and shuttling of drugs and antibodies. Nat. Commun. 10, 2621 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Jang, K. J. et al. Human kidney proximal tubule-on-a-chip for drug transport and nephrotoxicity assessment. Integr. Biol. 5, 1119–1129 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim, S. et al. Pharmacokinetic profile that reduces nephrotoxicity of gentamicin in a perfused kidney-on-a-chip. Biofabrication 8, 015021 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Sun, X. & Nunes, S. S. Biowire platform for maturation of human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. Methods 101, 21–26 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Nunes, S. S. et al. Biowire: A platform for maturation of human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes. Nat. Methods 10, 781–787 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Esch, E. W., Bahinski, A. & Huh, D. Organs-on-chips at the frontiers of drug discovery. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 14, 248–260 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Schimek, K. et al. Human multi-organ chip co-culture of bronchial lung culture and liver spheroids for substance exposure studies. Sci. Rep. 10, 7865 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Sharifi, F. et al. A foreign body response-on-a-chip platform. Adv. Healthc. Mater. 8, e1801425 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Kulthong, K. et al. Implementation of a dynamic intestinal gut-on-a-chip barrier model for transport studies of lipophilic dioxin congeners. RSC Adv. 8, 32440–32453 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. McDonald, J. C. et al. Fabrication of microfluidic systems in poly(dimethylsiloxane). Electrophoresis 21, 27–40 (2000).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Chen, Q., Li, G. & Nie, Y. Investigation and improvement of reversible microfluidic devices based on glass–PDMS–glass sandwich configuration. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 16, 83–90 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Thompson, C. S. & Abate, A. R. Adhesive-based bonding technique for PDMS microfluidic devices. Lab Chip 13, 632–635 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Cao, H. H. et al. Reversible bonding by dimethyl-methylphenylmethoxy siloxane-Based stamping technique for reusable poly(dimethylsiloxane) microfluidic chip. Micro Nano Lett. 10, 229–232 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Shiroma, L. S. et al. Self-regenerating and hybrid irreversible/reversible PDMS microfluidic devices. Sci. Rep. 6, 26032 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Pitingolo, G., Riaud, A., Nastruzzi, C. & Taly, V. Tunable and reversible gelatin-based bonding for microfluidic cell culture. Adv. Eng. Mater. 21, 1900145 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Dekker, S. et al. Standardized and modular microfluidic platform for fast Lab on Chip system development. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 272, 468–478 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  34. Tkachenko, E., Gutierrez, E., Ginsberg, M. H. & Groisman, A. An easy to assemble microfluidic perfusion device with a magnetic clamp. Lab Chip 9, 1085–1095 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Agarwal, A. Microfluidic heart on a chip for higher throughput pharmacological studies. Lab Chip 21, 3599–3608 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Esch, M. B., Ueno, H., Applegate, R. & Shuler, M. L. Modular, pumpless body-on-a-chip platform for the co-culture of GI tract epithelium and 3D primary liver tissue. Lab Chip 16, 2719–2729 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  37. Wang, Y. I., Abaci, H. E. & Shuler, M. L. Microfluidic blood–brain barrier model provides in vivo-like barrier properties for drug permeability screening. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 114, 184–194 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Satoh, T. et al. A multi-throughput multi-organ-on-a-chip system on a plate formatted pneumatic pressure-driven medium circulation platform. Lab Chip 18, 115–125 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Domansky, K. et al. Perfused multiwell plate for 3D liver tissue engineering. Lab Chip 10, 51–58 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Schaff, U. Y. et al. Vascular mimetics based on microfluidics for imaging the leukocyte-endothelial inflammatory response. Lab Chip 7, 448–456 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Crozatier, C. et al. Microfluidic modulus for convenient cell culture and screening experiments. Microelectron. Eng. 84, 1694–1697 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Tsou, J. et al. Spatial regulation of inflammation by human aortic endothelial cells in a linear gradient of shear stress. Microcirculation 15, 311–323 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Le Berre, M., Crozatier, C., Velve Casquillas, G. & Chen, Y. Reversible assembling of microfluidic devices by aspiration. Microelectron. Eng. 83, 1284–1287 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Khademhosseini, A. et al. Cell docking inside microwells within reversibly sealed microfluidic channels for fabricating multiphenotype cell arrays. Lab Chip 5, 1380–1386 (2005).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Rafat, M., Raad, D. R., Rowat, A. C. & Auguste, D. T. Fabrication of reversibly adhesive fluidic devices using magnetism. Lab Chip 9, 3016–3019 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Pitingolo, G., Nizard, P., Riaud, A. & Taly, V. Beyond the on/off chip trade-off: A reversibly sealed microfluidic platform for 3D tumor microtissue analysis. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 274, 393–401 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Rasponi, M. et al. Reliable magnetic reversible assembly of complex microfluidic devices: Fabrication, characterization, and biological validation. Microfluid. Nanofluidics 10, 1097–1107 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Tsao, C. W. & Lee, Y. P. Magnetic microparticle-polydimethylsiloxane composite for reversible microchannel bonding. Sci. Technol. Adv. Mater. 17, 2–11 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Shah, P. et al. A microfluidics-based in vitro model of the gastrointestinal human-microbe interface. Nat. Commun. 7, 11535 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Zhang, Y. S. Modular multi-organ-on-chips platform with physicochemical sensor integration. Proc. 2017 IEEE 60th Int. Midwest Symp. Circuits Syst. https://doi.org/10.1109/MWSCAS.2017.8052865 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Vittayarukskul, K. & Lee, A. P. A truly Lego® -like modular microfluidics platform. J. Micromech. Microeng. 27, 035004 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Xie, X., Maharjan, S., Liu, S., Zhang, Y. S. & Livermore, C. A modular, reconfigurable microfabricated assembly platform for microfluidic transport and multitype cell culture and drug testing. Micromachines 11, 2 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Collins, S. D. & Smith, R. L. Fluidic interconnects for modular assembly of chemical microsystems. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 49, 40–45 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. van Meer, B. J. et al. Small molecule absorption by PDMS in the context of drug response bioassays. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 482, 323–328 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Owens, C. E. & Hart, A. J. High-precision modular microfluidics by micromilling of interlocking injection-molded blocks. Lab Chip 18, 890–901 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Gomez, Y., Navarro-Tableros, V., Tetta, C., Camussi, G. & Brizzi, M. F. A versatile model of microfluidic perifusion system for the evaluation of C-peptide secretion profiles: Comparison between human pancreatic islets and HLSC-derived islet-like structures. Biomedicines 8, 26 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  57. Lenguito, G. et al. Resealable, optically accessible, PDMS-free fluidic platform for ex vivo interrogation of pancreatic islets. Lab Chip 17, 772–781 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Li, X., George, S. M., Vernetti, L., Gough, A. H. & Taylor, D. L. A glass-based, continuously zonated and vascularized human liver acinus microphysiological system (vLAMPS) designed for experimental modeling of diseases and ADME/TOX. Lab Chip 18, 2614–2631 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Paydar, O. H. et al. Characterization of 3D-printed microfluidic chip interconnects with integrated O-rings. Sens. Actuators, A Phys. 205, 199–203 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Shanti, A. et al. Multi-compartment 3D-cultured organ-on-a-chip: towards a biomimetic lymph node for drug development. Pharmaceutics 12, 464 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Pampaloni, F., Reynaud, E. G. & Stelzer, E. H. K. The third dimension bridges the gap between cell culture and live tissue. Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell Biol. 8, 839–845 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Park, J. et al. Three-dimensional brain-on-a-chip with an interstitial level of flow and its application as an in vitro model of Alzheimer’s disease. Lab Chip 15, 141–150 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  63. Kasendra, M. et al. Development of a primary human Small Intestine-on-a-Chip using biopsy-derived organoids. Sci. Rep. 8, 2871 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Kim, H. J., Li, H., Collins, J. J. & Ingber, D. E. Contributions of microbiome and mechanical deformation to intestinal bacterial overgrowth and inflammation in a human gut-on-a-chip. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, E7–E15 (2016).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Novak, R. et al. A robotic platform for fluidically-linked human body-on-chips experimentation. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4, 407–420 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Takahashi, Y. et al. 3D spheroid cultures improve the metabolic gene expression profiles of HepaRG cells. Biosci. Rep. 35, e00208 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Bell, C. C. et al. Characterization of primary human hepatocyte spheroids as a model system for drug-induced liver injury, liver function and disease. Sci. Rep. 6, 25187 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  68. Moshksayan, K. et al. Spheroids-on-a-chip: Recent advances and design considerations in microfluidic platforms for spheroid formation and culture. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 263, 151–176 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  69. Bavli, D. et al. Real-time monitoring of metabolic function in liver-onchip microdevices tracks the dynamics of Mitochondrial dysfunction. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 2231–2240 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Spence, J. R. et al. Directed differentiation of human pluripotent stem cells into intestinal tissue in vitro. Nature 470, 105–110 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  71. Nakano, T. et al. Self-formation of optic cups and storable stratified neural retina from human ESCs. Cell Stem Cell 10, 771–785 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  72. Takebe, T. et al. Vascularized and functional human liver from an iPSC-derived organ bud transplant. Nature 499, 481–484 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  73. Lancaster, M. A. et al. Guided self-organization and cortical plate formation in human brain organoids. Nat. Biotechnol. 35, 659–666 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  74. Homan, K. A. et al. Flow-enhanced vascularization and maturation of kidney organoids in vitro. Nat. Methods 16, 255–262 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Takebe, T., Zhang, B. & Radisic, M. Synergistic engineering: organoids meet organs-on-a-chip. Cell Stem Cell 21, 297–300 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  76. Park, S. E., Georgescu, A. & Huh, D. Organoids-on-a-chip. Science 965, 837–842 (2019).

    Google Scholar 

  77. Kakni, P. et al. Intestinal organoid culture in polymer film-based microwell arrays. Adv. Biosyst. 4, 2000126 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  78. Wong, A. P., Perez-Castillejos, R., Christopher Love, J. & Whitesides, G. M. Partitioning microfluidic channels with hydrogel to construct tunable 3-D cellular microenvironments. Biomaterials 29, 1853–1861 (2008).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  79. Mota, C., Camarero-Espinosa, S., Baker, M. B., Wieringa, P. & Moroni, L. Bioprinting: from tissue and organ development to in vitro models. Chem. Rev. 120, 10547–10607 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  80. Brassard, J. A., Nikolaev, M., Hübscher, T., Hofer, M. & Lutolf, M. P. Recapitulating macro-scale tissue self-organization through organoid bioprinting. Nat. Mater. 20, 22–29 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  81. Grigoryan, B. et al. Multivascular networks and functional intravascular topologies within biocompatible hydrogels. Science 364, 458–464 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  82. Bhise, N. S. et al. A liver-on-a-chip platform with bioprinted hepatic spheroids. Biofabrication 8, 14101 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  83. Zhang, Y. S. et al. Bioprinting 3D microfibrous scaffolds for engineering endothelialized myocardium and heart-on-a-chip. Biomaterials 110, 45–59 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  84. Skardal, A., Shupe, T. & Atala, A. Organoid-on-a-chip and body-on-a-chip systems for drug screening and disease modeling. Drug Discov. Today 21, 1399–1411 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  85. Zhang, Y. S. et al. Multisensor-integrated organs-on-chips platform for automated and continual in situ monitoring of organoid behaviors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, 2293–2302 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  86. Schimek, K. et al. Integrating biological vasculature into a multi-organ-chip microsystem. Lab Chip 13, 3588–3598 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  87. Sung, J. H. & Shuler, M. L. A micro cell culture analog (CCA) with 3-D hydrogel culture of multiple cell lines to assess metabolism-dependent cytotoxicity of anti-cancer drugs. Lab Chip 9, 1385–1394 (2009).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  88. Baert, Y. et al. A multi-organ-chip co-culture of liver and testis equivalents: A first step toward a systemic male reprotoxicity model. Hum. Reprod. 35, 1029–1044 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  89. Lin, N. et al. Repeated dose multi-drug testing using a microfluidic chip-based coculture of human liver and kidney proximal tubules equivalents. Sci. Rep. 10, 8879 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  90. Chramiec, A. et al. Integrated human organ-on-a-chip model for predictive studies of anti-tumor drug efficacy and cardiac safety. Lab Chip 20, 4357–4372 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  91. Ronaldson-Bouchard, K. et al. A multi-organ chip with matured tissue niches linked by vascular flow. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 6, 351–371 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  92. O’Reilly, L. P., Luke, C. J., Perlmutter, D. H., Silverman, G. A. & Pak, S. C. C. elegans in high-throughput drug discovery. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 69–70, 247–253 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Mondal, S. & Ben-Yakar, A. in Organ-on-a-chip: Engineered Microenvironments for Safety and Efficacy Testing Ch. 11, 363–390 (Academic Press, 2019).

  94. Westhoff, J. H. et al. Development of an automated imaging pipeline for the analysis of the zebrafish larval kidney. PLoS ONE 8, e82137 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. Peravali, R. et al. Automated feature detection and imaging for high-resolution screening of zebrafish embryos. Biotechniques 50, 319–324 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  96. Hulme, S. E. et al. Lifespan-on-a-chip: microfluidic chambers for performing lifelong observation of C. elegans. Lab Chip 10, 589–597 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  97. Hulme, S. E., Shevkoplyas, S. S., Apfeld, J., Fontana, W. & Whitesides, G. M. A microfabricated array of clamps for immobilizing and imaging C. elegans. Lab Chip 7, 1515–1523 (2007).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  98. Dong, L. et al. C . elegans immobilization using deformable microfluidics for in vivo studies of early embryogenesis and intestinal microbiota. in 2017 IEEE 30th International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS) 616–619 (IEEE, 2017).

  99. Mondal, S. et al. Large-scale microfluidics providing high-resolution and high-throughput screening of Caenorhabditis elegans poly-glutamine aggregation model. Nat. Commun. 7, 13023 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  100. Nghe, P. et al. Microfabricated polyacrylamide devices for the controlled culture of growing cells and developing organisms. PLoS ONE 8, e75537 (2013).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  101. Patra, B., Peng, C. C., Liao, W. H., Lee, C. H. & Tung, Y. C. Drug testing and flow cytometry analysis on a large number of uniform sized tumor spheroids using a microfluidic device. Sci. Rep. 6, 21061 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  102. Kim, H. J., Huh, D., Hamilton, G. & Ingber, D. E. Human gut-on-a-chip inhabited by microbial flora that experiences intestinal peristalsis-like motions and flow. Lab Chip 12, 2165–2174 (2012).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  103. Buchanan, B. C. & Yoon, J. Y. Microscopic imaging methods for organ-on-a-chip platforms. Micromachines 13, 328 (2022).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  104. Smith, A. S. T. et al. Utilization of microscale silicon cantilevers to assess cellular contractile function in vitro. J. Vis. Exp. 92, e51866 (2014).

    Google Scholar 

  105. Sasserath, T. et al. Differential monocyte actuation in a three-organ functional innate immune system-on-a-chip. Adv. Sci. 7, 2000323 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  106. Chin, H., Gillissen, J. J. J., Miyako, E. & Cho, N.-J. Microfluidic liquid cell chamber for scanning probe microscopy measurement application Microfluidic liquid cell chamber for scanning probe microscopy measurement application. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 90, 046105 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  107. Gottwald, E. et al. Characterization of a chip-based bioreactor for three-dimensional cell cultivation via magnetic resonance imaging. Z. Med. Phys. 23, 102–110 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  108. Miller, P. G. & Shuler, M. L. Design and demonstration of a pumpless 14 compartment microphysiological system. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 113, 2213–2227 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  109. Miller, P. G., Chen, C. Y., Wang, Y. I., Gao, E. & Shuler, M. L. Multiorgan microfluidic platform with breathable lung chamber for inhalation or intravenous drug screening and development. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 117, 486–497 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  110. Esch, M. B., Mahler, G. J., Stokol, T. & Shuler, M. L. Body-on-a-chip simulation with gastrointestinal tract and liver tissues suggests that ingested nanoparticles have the potential to cause liver injury. Lab Chip 14, 3081–3092 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  111. Sakolish, C. M. & Mahler, G. J. A novel microfluidic device to model the human proximal tubule and glomerulus. RSC Adv 7, 4216–4225 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  112. Nguyen, T. et al. Robust chemical bonding of PMMA microfluidic devices to porous PETE membranes for reliable cytotoxicity testing of drugs. Lab Chip 19, 3706–3713 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  113. Su, X. et al. Microfluidic cell culture and its application in high throughput drug screening: cardiotoxicity assay for hERG channels. J. Biomol. Screen 16, 101–111 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  114. Tsamandouras, N. et al. Integrated gut and liver microphysiological systems for quantitative in vitro pharmacokinetic studies. AAPS J. 19, 1499–1512 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  115. Edington, C. D. et al. Interconnected microphysiological systems for quantitative biology and pharmacology studies. Sci. Rep. 8, 4530 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  116. Yang, C. Z., Yaniger, S. I., Jordan, V. C., Klein, D. J. & Bittner, G. D. Most plastic products release estrogenic chemicals: A potential health problem that can be solved. Environ. Health Perspect. 119, 989–996 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  117. Burshtein, N., Chan, S. T., Toda-Peters, K., Shen, A. Q. & Haward, S. J. 3D-printed glass microfluidics for fluid dynamics and rheology. Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 43, 1–14 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  118. Campbell, S. B. et al. Beyond polydimethylsiloxane: alternative materials for fabrication of organ-on-a-chip devices and microphysiological systems. ACS Biomater. Sci. Eng. 7, 2880–2899 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  119. Leung, C. M. et al. A guide to the organ-on-a-chip. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 2, 33 (2022).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  120. Konda, A., Taylor, J. M., Stoller, M. A. & Morin, S. A. Reconfigurable microfluidic systems with reversible seals compatible with 2D and 3D surfaces of arbitrary chemical composition. Lab Chip 15, 2009–2017 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  121. Pereiro, I., Khartchenko, A. F., Petrini, L. & Kaigala, G. V. Nip the bubble in the bud: a guide to avoid gas nucleation in microfluidics. Lab Chip 19, 2296–2314 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  122. Wevers, N. R. et al. High-throughput compound evaluation on 3D networks of neurons and glia in a microfluidic platform. Sci. Rep. 6, 38856 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  123. Novak, R. et al. Robotic fluidic coupling and interrogation of multiple vascularized organ chips. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 4, 407–420 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  124. Cao, X. et al. A tumor-on-a-chip system with bioprinted blood and lymphatic vessel pair. Adv. Funct. Mater. 29, 1807173 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  125. Pires de Mello, C. et al. Microphysiological heart-liver body-on-a-chip system with skin mimic for evaluating topical drug delivery. Lab Chip 20, 749–759 (2020).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  126. Oleaga, C. et al. Long-term electrical and mechanical function monitoring of a human-on-a-chip system. Adv. Funct. Mater. 29, 1805792 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  127. Chen, W. L. K. et al. Integrated gut/liver microphysiological systems elucidates inflammatory inter-tissue crosstalk. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 114, 2648–2659 (2017).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  128. Wang, X., Cirit, M., Wishnok, J. S., Griffith, L. G. & Tannenbaum, S. R. Analysis of an integrated human multiorgan microphysiological system for combined tolcapone metabolism and brain metabolomics. Anal. Chem. 91, 8667–8675 (2019).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  129. Esch, M. B., Mahler, G. J., Stokol, T. & Shuler, M. L. Body-on-a-chip simulation with gastrointestinal tract and liver tissues suggests that ingested nanoparticles have the potential to cause liver injury. Lab Chip 14, 3081–3092 (2014).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  130. Moya, A. et al. Online oxygen monitoring using integrated inkjet-printed sensors in a liver-on-a-chip system. Lab Chip 18, 2023–2035 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  131. Maoz, B. M. et al. A linked organ-on-chip model of the human neurovascular unit reveals the metabolic coupling of endothelial and neuronal cells. Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 865–877 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  132. Sung, J. H., Kam, C. & Shuler, M. L. A microfluidic device for a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) model on a chip. Lab Chip 10, 446–455 (2010).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  133. Qu, Y. et al. A nephron model for study of drug-induced acute kidney injury and assessment of drug-induced nephrotoxicity. Biomaterials 155, 41–53 (2018).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  134. Ong, L. J. Y. et al. A 3D printed microfluidic perfusion device for multicellular spheroid cultures. Biofabrication 9, 045005 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  135. Hu, N. et al. Multisensor-integrated organs-on-chips platform for automated and continual in situ monitoring of organoid behaviors. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114, E2293–E2302 (2017).

    Google Scholar 

  136. Lamberti, A. et al. Microfluidic sealing and housing system for innovative dye-sensitized solar cell architecture. Microelectron. Eng. 88, 2308–2310 (2011).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  137. Gang, A., Haustein, N., Baraban, L. & Cuniberti, G. Multifunctional reversibly sealable microfluidic devices for patterned material deposition approaches. RSC Adv. 5, 11806–11811 (2015).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement number 825745.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Instructive Biomaterials Engineering, MERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands

    Daniel J. Teixeira Carvalho & Stefan Giselbrecht

  2. Department of Complex Tissue Regeneration, MERLN Institute for Technology-Inspired Regenerative Medicine, Maastricht University, Maastricht, Netherlands

    Lorenzo Moroni

Authors
  1. Daniel J. Teixeira Carvalho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lorenzo Moroni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stefan Giselbrecht
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

D.J.T.C. wrote and edited the manuscript. L.M. supervised the manuscript and S.G. supervised and edited the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stefan Giselbrecht.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

S.G. is founder and shareholder of 300MICRONS GmbH. D.J.T.C. and L.M. declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Reviews Materials thanks Yi-Chin Toh, Louis Ong and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Teixeira Carvalho, D.J., Moroni, L. & Giselbrecht, S. Clamping strategies for organ-on-a-chip devices. Nat Rev Mater 8, 147–164 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-022-00523-z

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41578-022-00523-z

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing: Translational Research

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Translational Research newsletter — top stories in biotechnology, drug discovery and pharma.

Get what matters in translational research, free to your inbox weekly. Sign up for Nature Briefing: Translational Research