Micromanipulation With Dielectrophoretic Forces: A Review

This review article critically assesses dielectrophoretic (DEP) micromanipulation and methodically examines the discrepancies between theoretical predictions and practical results in cell sorting, trapping, and biological applications. The analysis shows that many published claims of successful DEP-based manipulation are undermined by inadequate consideration of electrothermal and fluidodynamic artifacts, particularly AC electroosmosis (ACEO) and electrothermal flow (ETF), which can generate fluid velocities comparable to or exceeding DEP-induced particle motion under commonly employed conditions. DEP offers compelling advantages, such as label-free operation, frequency-tunable selectivity, and parallel processing capabilities. Joule heating-induced temperature increases of 10-40 K, electrode polarization that significantly alters field distributions at low frequencies, and the extensive use of non-physiological buffers that drastically change native cell activity are other dangers. The review provides a critical assessment of electrode geometries, biological micromanipulation applications, and numerical modeling approaches, while offering structured guidance on research gaps and future perspectives aimed at improving experimental rigor, reproducibility, and clinical translation of DEP-based technologies.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Electrophoresis
Published
2026-08-17
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/elps.70142
Primary Topic
Microfluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Micromanipulation With Dielectrophoretic Forces: A Review

Morteza Bayareh, Narges Jafari Ghahfarokhi, Minseok Kim
Electrophoresis
Microfluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
article

Micromanipulation With Dielectrophoretic Forces: A Review

Morteza Bayareh, Narges Jafari Ghahfarokhi, Minseok Kim
article en

Abstract

This review article critically assesses dielectrophoretic (DEP) micromanipulation and methodically examines the discrepancies between theoretical predictions and practical results in cell sorting, trapping, and biological applications. The analysis shows that many published claims of successful DEP-based manipulation are undermined by inadequate consideration of electrothermal and fluidodynamic artifacts, particularly AC electroosmosis (ACEO) and electrothermal flow (ETF), which can generate fluid velocities comparable to or exceeding DEP-induced particle motion under commonly employed conditions. DEP offers compelling advantages, such as label-free operation, frequency-tunable selectivity, and parallel processing capabilities. Joule heating-induced temperature increases of 10-40 K, electrode polarization that significantly alters field distributions at low frequencies, and the extensive use of non-physiological buffers that drastically change native cell activity are other dangers. The review provides a critical assessment of electrode geometries, biological micromanipulation applications, and numerical modeling approaches, while offering structured guidance on research gaps and future perspectives aimed at improving experimental rigor, reproducibility, and clinical translation of DEP-based technologies.

Electrophoresis
Kumoh National Institute of Technology (KR), Shahrekord University (IR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 18%
Microfluidic and Bio-sensing Technologies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.