Table 2.

A survey of existing microfluidic exosome separation methods

Type	Methods	Throughput	Recovery rate of exosomes	Purity of recovered exosomes	Biological samples used in the study	Reference
Label-free (size-based)	Nano-DLD	0.012 μL /h	N/A	N/A	Human urine	48
	Acoustics	240 μL/h	82%	98.4%	Whole blood, cell culture medium	47
	Pinched-flow fractionation	1200 μL/h	N/A	N/A	Cell culture medium	45
	AF4	267–1333 μL /h	N/A	N/A	Cell culture medium	49
	Nanowire trapping	600 μL /h	10%	N/A	Mixture of BSA, liposome and beads	46
	Viscoelastic	200 μL/h	>80%	> 90%	Cell culture medium, pure serum	31
	ExoTIC	5000 μL /h	>90%	N/A	Plasma, urine, lavage, cell culture medium	24
	Double filtration	2400 μL/h	92%	N/A	Cell culture medium, urine	25
	Exodisc-B/P	180–900 μL/h	76–88%	N/A	Whole blood, plasma, and cell culture medium	26
	FerroChip	60–180 μL/h	94.3%	87.9%	Cell culture medium and serum	This work
Label-based	iMER	240 μL / h	93%	N/A	Serum	44
	CD63-modified herringbone groves	∼ 800 μL / h	42–94%	N/A	Serum and cell culture medium	42
	CD41-modified mica surface	72 μL / h	N/A	N/A	Human plasma,	41
	ExoChip	240 μL / h	N/A	N/A	Serum	17
	nPLEX	500 μL / h	N/A	N/A	Ascites fluid	43
	Nano-IMEX	3 μL / h	N/A	N/A	Diluted plasma	19