Fabrication of a Malaria-Ab ELISA Bioassay Platform with Utilization of Syringe-Based and 3D Printed Assay Automation

Can 3D Printing Bring Droplet Microfluidics to Every Lab?-A Systematic Review

In recent years, additive manufacturing has steadily gained attention in both research and industry. Applications range from prototyping to small-scale production, with 3D printing offering reduced logistics overheads, better design flexibility and ease of use compared with traditional fabrication methods. In addition, printer and material costs have also decreased rapidly. These advantages make 3D printing attractive for application in microfluidic chip fabrication. However, 3D printing microfluidics is still a new area. Is the technology mature enough to print complex microchannel geometries, such as droplet microfluidics? Can 3D-printed droplet microfluidic chips be used in biological or chemical applications? Is 3D printing mature enough to be used in every research lab? These are the questions we will seek answers to in our systematic review. We will analyze (1) the key performance metrics of 3D-printed droplet microfluidics and (2) existing biological or chemical application areas. In addition, we evaluate (3) the potential of large-scale application of 3D printing microfluidics. Finally, (4) we discuss how 3D printing and digital design automation could trivialize microfluidic chip fabrication in the long term. Based on our analysis, we can conclude that today, 3D printers could already be used in every research lab. Printing droplet microfluidics is also a possibility, albeit with some challenges discussed in this review.

3D Printed Microfluidics

Traditional microfabrication techniques suffer from several disadvantages, including the inability to create truly three-dimensional (3D) architectures, expensive and time-consuming processes when changing device designs, and difficulty in transitioning from prototyping fabrication to bulk manufacturing. 3D printing is an emerging technique that could overcome these disadvantages. While most 3D printed fluidic devices and features to date have been on the millifluidic size scale, some truly microfluidic devices have been shown. Currently, stereolithography is the most promising approach for routine creation of microfluidic structures, but several approaches under development also have potential. Microfluidic 3D printing is still in an early stage, similar to where polydimethylsiloxane was two decades ago. With additional work to advance printer hardware and software control, expand and improve resin and printing material selections, and realize additional applications for 3D printed devices, we foresee 3D printing becoming the dominant microfluidic fabrication method.