TABLE1.
Method | Principle | Advantages | Disadvantages | Yield | Purity | Time | Equipment/material cost, $ | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ultracentrifugation | Centrifugation and ultracentrifugation steps | Cost-effective | Time consuming | Low | High | 2–20h | ∼3000/10 | Johnstone et al. (1989); Cvjetkovic et al. (2014); Gudbergsson et al. (2016); Helwa et al. (2017) |
Large primary sample size | ||||||||
Suitable for large volume preparation | Low accuracy | |||||||
Contamination with media proteins | ||||||||
Time consuming | ||||||||
Ultrafiltration | Centrifugation and filtration | Large primary sample size | Low portability | Low | High | ∼20h | 1000/20 | Cheruvanky et al. (2007); Lobb et al. (2015); Konoshenko et al. (2018) |
Sensitive to centrifugation time | ||||||||
Immunoaffinity enrichment | Nano-magnetic bead | Low primary sample volume | Costly | High | High | ∼1h | 0/650 | Tauro et al. (2012); Greening et al. (2015) |
High accuracy | ||||||||
Microfluidics | Microfluidic devices | Low primary sample volume | High-price | High | High | <2h | 4217/1400 | Chen et al. (2010); Zhang et al. (2016) |
Easily automated and integrated with diagnosis |