TABLE II.
Viability comparison between different alginate microgel encapsulation methods.
| Methods | Cell type | Test time | Viability | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| The present method | Primary human chondrocytes | Day 1 | 93.5 ± 4.5% | – |
| Photocrosslinking by visible light | Cat kidney epithelial cells (CRFK) cells | Day 0 | 85 ± 2.3% | 33 |
| External ironic crosslinking | Primary rabbit chondrocytes | Day 7 | 59 ± 18% | 2 |
| External ironic crosslinking; non-spherical microgels | Colon cancer cells (HCT116) | Day 0 | 50% | 34 |
| Internal ionic crosslinking | Jurkat cells | Day 0 | 19.3% to 74.3%a | 5 |
| Improved internal ionic crosslinking | Antibody-secreting hybridoma cells (9E10) | Day 0 | 84% | 7 |
| Mouse breast cancer cells (M6C) | 86% |
a
This dataset was not viability, but the percentage of live cells after the process, defined as (Nalive,after/Nalive,before) × 100%, where Nalive,before and Nalive,after referred to the percentage of cells alive before the experiment and the percentage of cells alive after the experiment, i.e., greater than the actual viability. In addition, this value varied greatly depending on the material systems.