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) |