Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2023 Jan 18;8(4):3630-3649.
doi: 10.1021/acsomega.2c06052. eCollection 2023 Jan 31.

Spheroid Engineering in Microfluidic Devices

Affiliations
Review

Spheroid Engineering in Microfluidic Devices

Atakan Tevlek et al. ACS Omega. .

Abstract

Two-dimensional (2D) cell culture techniques are commonly employed to investigate biophysical and biochemical cellular responses. However, these culture methods, having monolayer cells, lack cell-cell and cell-extracellular matrix interactions, mimicking the cell microenvironment and multicellular organization. Three-dimensional (3D) cell culture methods enable equal transportation of nutrients, gas, and growth factors among cells and their microenvironment. Therefore, 3D cultures show similar cell proliferation, apoptosis, and differentiation properties to in vivo. A spheroid is defined as self-assembled 3D cell aggregates, and it closely mimics a cell microenvironment in vitro thanks to cell-cell/matrix interactions, which enables its use in several important applications in medical and clinical research. To fabricate a spheroid, conventional methods such as liquid overlay, hanging drop, and so forth are available. However, these labor-intensive methods result in low-throughput fabrication and uncontrollable spheroid sizes. On the other hand, microfluidic methods enable inexpensive and rapid fabrication of spheroids with high precision. Furthermore, fabricated spheroids can also be cultured in microfluidic devices for controllable cell perfusion, simulation of fluid shear effects, and mimicking of the microenvironment-like in vivo conditions. This review focuses on recent microfluidic spheroid fabrication techniques and also organ-on-a-chip applications of spheroids, which are used in different disease modeling and drug development studies.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Conventional 3D cell culture techniques for spheroid formation: (A) hanging drop, (B) liquid overlay, (C) spinner bioreactors, (D) rotating bioreactors, (E) ultralow attachment plates, (F) liquid marbles, (G) magnetic levitation, and (H) gel embedding.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Illustrations for microfluidic-based methods in spheroid formation. (A) Droplet-based methods: (1) T-junction breaks up the dispersed phase with a sheath flow; (2) in co-flowing, the dispersed phase is generated with a needle or tube; and (3) flow focusing uses two sheath flows for breaking of the dispersed phase. (B) Electrowetting generated with an electrode pattern. (C) Microwells in channels. (D) Microfluidic hanging drop with open wells in the channel. (E) Microstructure for cell trapping. (F) Acoustic manipulations. (G) Dielectrophoresis with a nonuniform electrical field. (i), (ii), and (iii) represent spheroids formation steps in all images.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Gupta N.; Liu J. R.; Patel B.; Solomon D. E.; Vaidya B.; Gupta V. Microfluidics-based 3D Cell Culture Models: Utility in Novel Drug Discovery and Delivery Research. Bioeng. Transl. Med. 2016, 1, 63.10.1002/btm2.10013. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Breslin S.; O’Driscoll L. Three-Dimensional Cell Culture: The Missing Link in Drug Discovery. Drug Discovery Today 2013, 18, 240.10.1016/j.drudis.2012.10.003. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Hudu S. A.; Alshrari A. S.; Syahida A.; Sekawi Z. Cell Culture, Technology: Enhancing the Culture of Diagnosing Human Diseases. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 2016, 10.7860/JCDR/2016/15837.7460. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Duval K.; Grover H.; Han L. H.; Mou Y.; Pegoraro A. F.; Fredberg J.; Chen Z. Modeling Physiological Events in 2D vs. 3D Cell Culture. Physiology. 2017, 32, 266.10.1152/physiol.00036.2016. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Ravi M.; Paramesh V.; Kaviya S. R.; Anuradha E.; Solomon F. D. P. 3D Cell Culture Systems: Advantages and Applications. J. Cell. Physiol. 2015, 230, 16.10.1002/jcp.24683. - DOI - PubMed