Table 1 Comparison of representative methods in measuring cell mechanics [8, 14,15,16]
From: Application of atomic force microscopy in cancer research
Methods | Advantages | Disadvantages |
|---|---|---|
Microfluidics | High throughput (~ 1 cell/s); ability to control cell environment and approximate physiological conditions | Be prone to cell adhesion and clogging; limited materials for fabricating devices; cell size is often neglected |
Micropipette aspiration | Simple and cost-effective; large range of force (up to ~ 100 nN) | Low throughput; limited special resolution (< 1 cell/10 min); possible damage to cells; mainly for suspended cells |
Micropost arrays | Ability to measure the traction forces of single cells or cell populations | Mainly for adherent cells; high cost and complexity; the topology of micropost arrays may influence cell activities |
Magnetic twisting cytometry | Probing the local mechanics of cells; magnetic beads can be bound with diverse types of cellular molecules or structures | Low throughput (< 1 cell/min); difficult to standardize; only for unidirectional forces |
Optical tweezers | High precision measurements of small forces (0.01–103 pN); can be integrated with microfluidic delivery | Limited force (< 500 pN) applied on cells; detrimental effects on cells due to heating |
Parallel plate | Simple and cost-effective; ability to study single cells of cell populations | Low throughout; low spatial resolution |
Atomic force microscopy | Applicable for both suspended cells and adherent cells; simultaneously obtain structural and mechanical information with nanometer resolution | Low throughput (< 1 cell/10 min); the mechanical poking of the AFM tip may influence cell activities |