Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 May 5.
Published in final edited form as: Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013 Sep 30;49(4):469–476. doi: 10.1038/bmt.2013.152

Table 3.

Methods and Devices for DMSO Removal

Methods or devices Mechanism Comments, pros and cons References
Centrifugation Centrifugation

  • Most widely applied procedure for CPA removal so far.

  • Pros: conventional devices available widely

  • Cons: high time and labor consumption, cell loss, high risk of contamination, etc.

 (2,7,13,16,39,50,56–58,74)
CytoMate™ Filtration by spinning membrane

  • Pros: automated, effective and allowing a step-by-step user definable programming, low risk of contamination

  • Cons: high cost and cell loss due to clumping

 (13,54,107)
Sepax S-100 Consisting steps of dilution and centrifugation using a rotating syringe

  • Pros: fast, automated processing, low risk of contamination

  • Cons: high cost and cell loss due to clumping

 (56,58)
Cobe 2991 Centrifugation

  • Pros: fast, automated processing, low risk of contamination

  • Cons: high cost and cell loss due to clumping

 (5,50,115)
Microfluidic method Diffusion-based extraction in microfluidic channels

  • Pros: automated processing, elegant, effective for CPA removal for samples with small volumes

  • Cons: hard to be scaled up for samples with large volume

 (116,117)
Dialysis through hollow-fiber dialyzer Dialysis across semi-permeable hollow fiber membranes

  • Pros: automated processing, effective CPA removal, low risk of contamination

  • Cons: optimization needed for samples with small volume

 (118,119)
Dilution-filtration through hollow-fiber dialyzer Controlled dilution and controlled filtration through semi-permeable hollow fiber membranes

  • Pros: fast, automated processing, low risk of contamination, low-cost, controllable, effective CPA removal

  • Cons: optimization needed for samples with small volume

 (93)