Analytical and preparative applications of magnetic split-flow thin fractionation on several ion-labeled red blood cells.

BACKGROUND

Magnetic Split-flow thin (SPLITT) fractionation is a newly developed technique for separating magnetically susceptible particles. Particles with different field-induced velocities can be separated into two fractions by adjusting applied magnetic forces and flow-rates at inlets and outlets.

METHODS

Magnetic particles, Dynabeads, were used to test this new approach of field-induced velocity for susceptibility determination using magnetic SF at different magnetic field intensities. Reference measurements of magnetic susceptibility were made using a superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometer. Various ion-labeled red blood cells (RBC) were used to study susceptibility determination and throughput parameters for analytical and preparative applications of magnetic SPLITT fractionation (SF), respectively. Throughputs were studied at different sample concentrations, magnetic field intensities, and channel flow-rates.

RESULTS

The susceptibilities of Dynabeads determined by SPLITT fractionation (SF) were consistent with those of reference measurement using a superconducting quantum interference device (SQUID) magnetometer. Determined susceptibilities of ion-labeled RBC were consistent within 9.6% variations at two magnetic intensities and different flow-rates. The determined susceptibilities differed by 10% from referenced measurements. The minimum difference in magnetic susceptibility required for complete separation was about 5.0 x 10(-6) [cgs]. Sample recoveries were higher than 92%. The throughput of magnetic SF was approximately 1.8 g/h using our experimental setup.

CONCLUSION

Magnetic SF can provide simple and economical determination of particle susceptibility. This technique also has great potential for cell separation and related analysis. Continuous separations of ion-labeled RBC using magnetic SF were successful over 4 hours. The throughput was increased by 18 folds versus early study. Sample recoveries were 93.1 +/- 1.8% in triplicate experiments.