Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sensors and Actuators A: Physical

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/sna

A portable, optical scanning microsystem for large field of view, high

resolution imaging of biological specimens
Georgia Korompili a,b , Georgios Kanakaris a , Christos Ampatis a , Nikos Chronis a,b,∗
a
Institute of Nanotechnology and Nanoscience, N.C.S.R. Demokritos, Athens, Greece
b
Department of Materials Science and Technology, University of Crete, Irakleion, Greece

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Adapting medical technology for use at the point of care, demands the development of portable, robust
Received 13 January 2018 and accurate systems for the early diagnosis and monitoring of a wide range of diseases. Microscopy at the
Received in revised form 3 June 2018 point of care, fueled by recent advances in micro-optics, micro-electronics and micro-electromechanical
Accepted 17 June 2018
systems, is an emerging and promising field. However, imaging devices already developed remain rather
Available online 24 June 2018
sophisticated and bulky, mainly because of failure to address the most challenging technical limitation:
to combine large field-of-view (FOV) with high resolution imaging of biological specimens. To address
Keywords:
this need, we developed a portable, optical scanning microsystem that can image - with approximately
Point-of-care
Microscopy
1 ␮m resolution- large areas (6 mm × 40 mm) from various biological samples. This is achieved through
Large field of view the use of a microfabricated - 2D lens array that scans a sample in 1 direction in few minutes. We
Optical imaging demonstrated that our system can image blood smear and identify single white blood cells immobilized
Lens array in a microfluidic chip.
© 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction for progress monitoring and treatment adjustment in the case of

Early diagnosis and accurate continuous monitoring of the
progress of a disease are both considered of critical impor-
tance. However, time consuming procedures and costly equipment
required in many cases, act as serious obstacles in the early
screening of a disease. Though, in the developed world advanced
infrastructure and well-trained healthcare professionals are avail-
able, the cost of healthcare can still be prohibitive for patients
to seek diagnosis. In low-resources settings, access to medical
equipment may not even be available [1]. To address these issues,
there is an emerging trend to adapt a patient-centered health-
care [2]. The use of point-of-care devices is part of this trend with
excellent application in the field of microscopy imaging of biolog-
ical specimens [3]. Recent technological advances in micro-optics,
micro-electronics and micro-electromechanical systems (MEMS)
have the potential to improve screening and detection of a wide
range of diseases at the point-of-care in primary health care settings
in both low and high-resource countries.
Microscopy imaging is the gold standard for the diagnosis of
malaria, tuberculosis and sickle cell anemia, while it is also used
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: chronis@umich.edu (N. Chronis).
HIV-infected patients and patients undergoing chemotherapy for
cancer treatment. Whole slide blood imaging and cell population
counting represent irreplaceable steps of the diagnostic procedure
in many cases. The conventional diagnostic process of Malaria,
common infection in sub-Saharan region, is based on microscopic
examination of stained peripheral blood smears. The standard pro-
cess requires examination of the entire smear slide with light
microscope to detect infected cells [4,5]. For HIV infected indi-
viduals, CD4+ T cell concentration is a common test to perform to
define the response of the immune system to antiretroviral therapy.
Cell count can be accurately extracted through microscopy imag-
ing of a drop of patient’s blood (1–10 ␮l), though flow cytometry
remains the gold standard [6]. In tuberculosis-endemic countries,
the low-cost, fast and accurate microscopy imaging of smears of
non-concentrated sputum with Ziehl-Neelsen staining is the most
common diagnostic test [7]. Other hematologic diseases, such as
sickle cell anemia also require microscopy imaging for highly spe-
cific diagnosis. In both low and high-resource countries, frequent
counting of white blood cells is required for patients undergoing
chemotherapy or radiation therapy for cancer treatment as low
white blood cell counts often represent an important side effect.
In general, in vitro biological specimen imaging such as blood
film or sputum is considered as the most promising field of applica-
tion for automated and miniaturized medical instrumentation that

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2018.06.034
0924-4247/© 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
368 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375
could be used at the point of care [8]. High accuracy, in terms of
specificity and sensitivity, low cost, portability, ease of use and low
power consumption are the specifications imposed by the World
Health Organization for devices used at the point-of-care in poor-
resources settings [9]. Though a large number of devices have been
developed in the field of automated portable imaging systems,
unfortunately, so far, none of them has succeeded in complying
with all criteria. Particularly, concerning the technical limitations
and challenges met, major problem is the need to combine high
resolution with large FOV imaging of the biological sample [8].
To address this need, two main approaches have been widely
studied: (a) whole slide scanning [10–12] and (b) lens-free imag-
ing techniques [13–16]. In particular, a certain number of evolved
devices perform 2 or 3 direction scanning to cover an extended
area of tissue or blood sample [11,12]. In these approaches, sophis-
ticated motorized systems and complicated optical systems are
employed, resulting in an increased cost of manufacturing. In cases
where scanning components are excluded, medium or large format
detectors have to be used instead [13], increasing furthermore the
production cost. In case of non-scanning devices, the resolution is
limited by the pixel size of the large format detector in use, much
larger than desired resolution of at least a few micrometers. To com-
pensate large pixel size of these sensors – approximately 10 ␮m –
the existing approaches make use of complicated and bulk optical
systems or sophisticated software algorithms for image infor-
mation extraction. Consequently, time and computational power
requirements radically increase. It is also a fact that the samples
tested need to be rather sparse to reduce possible loss of informa-
tion due to actual low resolution efficiency [13]. The same problems
of augmented computational power demands and sparse sample
requirements are encountered in approaches of lens-free imaging
systems [13–16]. In the aforementioned platforms, image process-
ing algorithms are used to detect particles in a sample, based on the
shadow produced by the particles. Thus, provided accuracy may be
highly affected by the sample density and result in a large number
of lost particles in case of dense specimens. Preprocessing of blood
is therefore a demand and a possible obstacle in areas where the
necessary laboratory equipment is unavailable.
With the advent of mobile phones, their extensive use and their
fast technological development, there has been an integration of
phone cameras in devices for cytological or histological specimen
imaging. These devices, though assuring portability and autonomy,
incorporate complicated and expensive optical systems to perform
high resolution imaging by radically decreasing the detection area
[17,18]. Though phone cameras provide high quality imaging, they
are restricted for a short range of applications and are incapable of
providing extended region imaging, unless combined with a scan-
ning system.
Rapid progress in microfabrication technology resulted in an
emerging trend towards the use of micro-lens arrays. The integra-
tion of high numerical aperture micro-lenses in optical systems,
benefits of high resolving power, large FOV imaging and radically
decreases cost of manufacturing. The inevitable problem of whole
slide imaging related to the use of micro-lens arrays is caused by
the existence of undetected areas of the imaged specimen due to
the blind regions between neighbor lenses in an array. To mitigate
this challenge, in some cases a multilayer lens-array assembly is
employed, improving also provided resolution, while a sophisti-
cated, 2 or 3 direction- scanning system can additionally be used
[12]. Such an approach increases the manufacturing cost of the
equipment, while it is rather questionable whether it meets the
criteria of compactness and portability.
Despite the numerous approaches that already exist, the field
still presents a challenge as there has been no approach that could
overcome the aforementioned obstacles and provide a general pur-
pose, portable, low-cost device for high resolution and wide FOV
imaging. To be effective at the point-of-care, evolved technologies
need to be simple [19]. Our approach proposes the use of a specially
patterned mini-lens array combined with a simple, one direction
(1D) scanning system for whole slide, high resolution imaging of
a biological specimen. The large FOV (290 ␮m) and high numeri-
cal aperture (NA∼0.7) of the used sapphire ball lenses reduce the
number of required images – approximately 400 images for a 4 cm
long sample surface in 1X magnification. The simplicity of the pro-
posed portable system – one direction scanning and one layer of
mini-lenses (1 mm in diameter) – render it compact, inexpensive
and with low power requirements. It is, therefore, ideal for use in
poor resources areas.
2. Materials and methods
We developed an imaging, scanning platform (Fig. 1) that com-
prises of three components: (a) an optical, scanning head that
images the specimen of interest (b) a motorized, translation stage
that is responsible for moving the optical head along the specimen
(1D scanning) and (c) an external white light LED array (Edmund
Optics, #66-830) that provides homogeneous illumination of the
entire specimen. The optical head is an assembly of a 10.7 Mpixel
monochrome CMOS sensor (Imaging Source, DMM 27UJ003-ML)
and of a custom-made mini-lens array. The optical head is attached
to the translation stage that is connected to a computer-controlled,
stepper motor through a lead screw. The specimen – typically blood
sample inserted in a microfluidic chamber or sitting on a glass slide
or coverslip – is placed at a short distance (∼0–500 ␮m) from the
optical head and it is illuminated by the LED array light source. The
CMOS/mini-lens array assembly moves in one direction and has a
travelling distance of approximately 40 mm. This configuration cre-
ates a 40 mm x 6 mm image of the specimen. The distances between
the mini-lens array, the CMOS sensor and the specimen are con-
trolled by two step motors (20 ␮m step, 3 mm range) that allow
us to obtain a sharp, focused image of the sample. The focusing
procedure is performed prior to every scan.
2.1. The optical, scanning head
The optical, scanning head is responsible for image acquisition
process. It comprises of a microfabricated lenslens array, a 10.7
Mpixel CMOS camera (of 1.67 ␮m square pixels) and two, com-
puter controlled, stepper motors that control the distance between
the sample, the lens array and the detector. The two stepper motors
are used to achieve sharp in-focus images as well as to operate in
different magnification modes – from 1X up to 4X magnification.
The operational principle of the entire scanning system is based on
the special design of the lens array. 36 sapphire ball lenses of high
numerical aperture (NA∼0.7), refractive index of 1.67 and 1 mm
in diameter (EDMUND OPTICS #43-638) are placed on top of a
specially patterned silicon die to form the array of mini-lenses.
The mini-lens array is fabricated using standard microfabrica-
tion techniques (supplementary Fig. 1). A 400 ␮m thick, silicon
wafer is Deep Reactive Ion Etched (DRIE) to create 960 ␮m in
diameter, wafer-through holes [20]. After the etching process is
completed, individual dies are glued with a UV curable optical adhe-
sive (NORLAND 60, refractive index 1.62) on thin, glass coverslips
of standard thickness (#1, 130–170 ␮m) to form the wells upon
which the lenses are placed. The same adhesive is used to fill the
wells and secure the lenses on top of the wells.
The design of the lens array is the key element of the operation
of the entire system. The wells are patterned so that all mini-lenses
in the array are equally spaced with an edge-to-edge distance of
50 ␮m. The lens array is placed with a tilt angle of ␸ = 17◦ with
respect to the scanning direction. This tilted design assures that
 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375 369

Fig. 1. (a) Schematic of the architecture of the portable scanning microsystem, (b) photograph of the prototype and close-up view of the optical head. The size of the prototype
is 21 cm × 8 cm × 11 cm and it weights ∼1 kg, (c) schematic of the optical/scanning head illustrating the imaging principle.

Fig. 2. (a) Top view schematic and picture of the lens array. The black dotted outline indicates the effective imaging area of the CMOS sensor, the green rectangular represents
the silicon chip; (b) The tilt (17◦ ) of the mini-lens array and the overlap between the FOV of neighboring lenses are crucial for covering blind areas between the lenses; (c)
Estimation of the FOV of a lens (∼290 ␮m) based on a grid of lines imaged with the CMOS sensor in 1X magnification mode. The FOV is the diameter of the disc area where
light intensity is not lower than 90% of its maximum value (center of the lens).

the diameter of the FOV of one lens – estimated approximately at The calculation of the tilt angle ␸ was based on the geometry
290 ␮m – has an overlap with the FOV of the neighboring lenses by of the array, where (␸ = (0.8 x lens FOV diameter) / (Lens diame-
a factor of 20% (Fig. 2). Thus, by performing one direction scanning, ter + Lenses distance). The measurement of the FOV was performed
there are no undetected areas of the sample. with the use of a lines grid projection over the CMOS surface. The
370 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375
estimated 290 ␮m FOV is the diameter of the disc surface where
light intensity is not lower than 90% of its maximum value – located
at the center of the lens.
The quality of the produced image is dependent on the manufac-
turing and assembly process of the optical head components (see
supplementary material). The characterization procedure aims at
accurately defining the uniformity of the assembled mini-lens array
in terms of resolution and contrast. Ideally, we require a perfectly
uniform array in the sense that all lenses are focused on the same
plane and they provide an image of the sample with the same res-
olution, magnification and contrast. In order to quantify the optical
performance of the scanner and the uniformity of the lens array, we
conducted two experiments: (a) we measured the contrast across
the mini-lens array (36 imaging units) and (b) we measured the
in-focus factor for each lens as they are not located in the same
plane within the array. The in-focus factor is a measurement of
focus that represents the ability of each lens to focus the image
to the CMOS sensor. It has its maximum value at the best focused
image plane. The defocusing error in each case can be extracted as
the subtraction of the in-focus factor from 1, which is the maximum
normalized in-focus factor. For quantifying the resolution and con-
trast, a line-pairs pattern of a chrome film (100 nm thick) deposited
on glass slide was imaged in 1X and 4X magnification mode. The
contrast (C), obtained from greyscale images from each lens, was
based on the Michelson formula [21]: C = standard deviation of the
light intensity gradient/ mean of light intensity gradient.
For quantifying the defocusing error, a series of images from a
whole blood smear test were obtained by varying the mini-lens
array to CMOS distance from 500 ␮m up to 1500 ␮m with a step
of 20 ␮m. An image processing algorithm based on image curva-
ture focus measure [22] for the automatic detection of the sharpest
image was used [23,24].
2.2. The motorized, translation stage
A motorized, translation stage is responsible for the movement
of the optical, scanning head across the scanning direction. It com-
prises of a step motor, a lead screw upon which the optical head
is sliding, a motor driver to control the step motor, an electron-
ics board with an Arduino UNO Microcontroller and a flat sample
holder located on top of the stage, where the biological specimen
is placed. The stepper motor providing 200 steps per revolution is
connected through a motor flex coupler with the leadscrew. The
scanning head is able to move with a minimum 5 ␮m step for cov-
ering a distance of 40 mm maximum range. This scanning head
is moving right beneath the sample – either typical microfluidic
chamber or glass slide – across its long axis. It is kept in place dur-
ing scanning with the use of two flexible strips. A window of the
sample holder allows optical access to the specimen from the side
of the scanning head, with the lens-array being able to move close
to the sample and achieve high magnification.
The sample holder can host a standard glass slide of
60 mm x 22 mm, however the scanned surface is defined by the
CMOS sensor size and the maximum possible scanning range of the
stepper motor. Thus, the surface that can be scanned has 5.7 mm
width – equal to the length of the CMOS sensor – and 40 mm length
– equal to the maximum scanning range, rendering the device ideal
for use with microfluidic biochips respectively wide and long.
The maximum adequate step for the entire chip scanning with-
out undetected areas is defined by the design of the lens array and
by the overlap between neighboring lenses. Based on the theoret-
ical study of the lens-array properties the maximum allowed step
size should not exceed 0.6*FOV Diameter = 174 ␮m at 1X magnifi-
cation.
To eliminate repeatability error between different scans, the
device is programmed to return to ‘zero position’ before executing a
new scan. During scanning, the device performs only one direction
translation of the optical head.
Based on working principle the characterization procedure
needs to define the error induced by the motorized stage during
scanning. Any imperfections or misalignments in the assembly of
the components of the stage may result in a defocusing error due
to non-parallel move of the optical head with respect to the sample
holder. Image curvature focus measure [22] was used to quantify
the defocus error induced for 26 equally spaced (1000 ␮m) posi-
tions along the scanning range.
2.3. The illumination source
The illumination source is a square homogeneous light source
(EDMUND OPTICS, part number #66-830) with 5 cm side length.
The light source covers the entire imaged area and does not need
to move during scanning. This light source consists of an LED array
(operated at 24 V) covered by a diffuser. The emitted light is homo-
geneously diffused onto the biological sample and it is distributed
over a surface 6% wider than the surface of the source. The entire
scanner along with the light source is placed inside a PMMA opaque
enclosure to prevent ambient light from entering the scanner.
The distance between the light source and the sample affects
the contrast of the produced image. If that distance is short, then
images obtained from neighboring lenses and projected to overlap-
ping areas on a CMOS sensor – a phenomenon known as crosstalk.
Crosstalk is frequently encountered in micro-lens arrays [25] and
affects image quality as the original image appears blurred. In the
case of a non-collimated light source, such as an LED array, increas-
ing the distance between the LED array and the sample can reduce
crosstalk, as diverging rays originating from the LED array do not
reach the sample. To select the minimum LED-sample distance
where crosstalk is adequately reduced, we measured the contrast
of the produced image at different distances.
3. Results
3.1. Magnification range of the optical head
The proposed imaging platform can operate at 1X-4X magni-
fication range. An image curvature focus measure algorithm was
used to automatically select the best focal plane and determine the
positions of the lens array and the CMOS sensor with respect to the
sample (Fig. 3).
3.2. Resolution at maximum (4X) and minimum (1X)
magnification
The resolution of our system at 1X and 4X magnification was
experimentally measured using a custom-made resolution pattern
(Fig. 4). The design of the resolution pattern was similar to the
1951 USAF resolution test chart. It was patterned on a thin Cr film
using e-beam lithography. The maximum optical resolution was
approximately 0.98 ␮m and 1.95 ␮m at 4X and 1X magnification
respectively.
3.3. Sharpness and contrast uniformity of the images produced by
the lenses of the array
The image curvature focus factor was measured for each lens
using a smear blood test when the lens array is at the closest posi-
tion to the sample – 0 ␮m lens to sample distance. At this position
of maximum magnification and resolution the out-of-focus error of
the lenses of the array is expected to be maximized. 31 lenses – out
of 36 – were selected for this experiment, as those lenses captured
images that fitted entirely into the CMOS effective detection area.
 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375 371

Fig. 3. The distances of the lens array and the CMOS detector with respect to the sample are determined with the use of image curvature based autofocus algorithm. The
magnification range (1X-4X) was calculated by the projection on the CMOS effective area of 10 ␮m width, chrome, line pairs patterned on glass slide.

Fig. 4. A photograph of the resolution line pattern as imaged through a single lens at 1X (A) and 4X (B) magnification and their corresponding light intensity profiles. The red
line in the images indicates the length where the intensity profile was quantified. A minimum line width of 1.95 ␮m and 0.98 ␮m was detected at 1X and 4X magnification
respectively.

The best focused image produced by the array was selected as the
one that the averaged out-of-focus factor (averaged from all lenses)
was minimum. At this image, defocusing error, measured for each
lens separately, was less than 20% while the contrast was within
12% of its maximum value (Fig. 5).
3.4. Sharpness imaging uniformity along scanning direction
The image curvature based autofocus algorithm was used to
quantify the defocusing error induced during scanning. This error is
presented as the variations of the in-focus factor measured for one
lens in the array in equally spaced (1 mm) positions of the optical
head for a smear blood test 25 mm long. The slight variations (less
than 5%) are attributed to differences in the pattern of smear blood
cells monitored in each position as no noticeable drift is present.
The precision of the step motor employed allows for automatic
stitching of the images acquired by each lens during scanning. Since
no repeatability step error is present, the images of the specimen
can be cropped in the borders of FOV of each lens and stitched
automatically to produce 36 images of the sample, each one corre-
sponding to a different optical unit in the lens array (Fig. 6).
3.5. Minimizing crosstalk
Crosstalk is a significant drawback of lens arrays [25,26] as it
deteriorates image quality. It can be minimized by using collimated
372 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375

Fig. 5. In-focus factor normalized for each lens within the array, as measured by images obtained from a blood smear test (left); Contrast of the image produced by each lens
of the array (right); 5 lenses were excluded from this experiment as they did not produce high quality images.

Fig. 6. (a) De-focusing error versus position of the optical head along the scanning direction. The de-focusing error was induced by fabrication imperfections or assembly
misalignments in the components of the motorized scanning stage. The in-focus factor – measured for one lens across the scanning length – remains for all positions of the
optical head within 5% of the best in-focus image. (b) Stitching of 20 images acquired from one lens in the array with a scanning step of 100 ␮m. The resulting image monitors
an area of the sample 2 mm long. Precision stepping allows for automatic stitching of the images.
light sources. The same result can be accomplished by placing a blood cells captured and detected. The chip comprises of two 16 ␮m
non-collimated light source at a large distance from the sample. In thick chambers of 1 ␮l total volume each, functionalized with
order to quantify the crosstalk, we measured the contrast in our human CD45 biotinylated antibody to capture white blood cells
system for different distance between the LED source and the sam- (WBCs). Red blood cells (RBCs) were washed away. The 40 mm long
ple (Fig. 7). The best contrast was obtained at distances of 40 cm and chip was scanned with our device within a few minutes. The images
above. For practical reasons, we used a distance of 22 cm, where the acquired were automatically processed to produce the entire image
contrast was ∼0.89 and it was adequate to clearly image blood cells of the scanned surface (Fig. 8).
from a blood smear test. The image processing algorithm comprises of the following
steps: (a) cropping of the FOV of each lens, (b) vignetting effect
3.6. Image mosaicing and cell detection correction for each cropped image, (c) automatic stitching of the
images of each lens and mosaicing of the entire image. Vignetting
As a proof of concept for the operation of the device we present effect induced by the spherical surface of the lenses is reduced
the image acquired from a typical microfluidic chip with white through measurement of the sharpness of gradient distribution
 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375 373

Fig. 7. Normalized contrast versus light source to sample distance (A). Larger distances result in less crosstalk and clearer images as diverging rays do not reach the mini-lens
array (B).

Fig. 8. (a) Schematic of the microfluidic chip with 2 parallel chambers used for the experiment. The dotted square indicates the scanned surface. (b) Stitched image of the 4 cm
long microfluidic chip of two parallel chambers. (c) Zoom-in of the image in the region of inlets. (d) WBCs captured in the microfluidic chamber (e) automatically detected
WBCs (indicated with an arrow) with Sobel operator image segmentation algorithm.
374 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375
[27]. Captured WBCs can be easily observed and automatically
detected with the use of image segmentation technique with Sobel
operator [28]. All methods were implemented using MATLAB ver-
sion 9.0.0.341360 (R2016a) and the additional image processing
toolbox 9.4.
4. Discussion
We developed a portable, optical, scanning system that can
image a large area (6 mm x 40 mm) with approximately 1 ␮m opti-
cal resolution in 4X magnification. The system operates in white
light transmission mode and completes a full scan in a few min-
utes. We validated our system by presenting smear blood test
images and by performing single white blood cell count from a
typical CD45 functionalized microfluidic chamber in an automated
fashion. Although the developed prototype is connected to a com-
puter through an Arduino controller and to two power supplies that
power the stepper motors and the LED array, an integrated, portable
system could be envisioned by using a microcontroller with ade-
quate available memory (such as a Raspberry pi) to control all
the components (CMOS sensor, LED array, motors) and to perform
scanning and cell counting. We estimated that such an integrated
system would require ∼10 W (2 W for the steppers motors, 2 W for
the LED array, 6 W for the microcontolller and the CMOS sensors)
and would weight < 3 kg. Such a power requirement can be easily
provided by a commercial battery (e.g. a smartphone battery) or
even a solar panel.
Image quality could be further improved by making few modi-
fications in the current system. Optical resolution is limited by the
pixel size of the CMOS sensor (current pixel size is 1.67 ␮m). A
CMOS sensor with a smaller pixel size would greatly improve the
resolution. Decreasing the lens-to-lens distance would minimize
the dead imaging area between the lenses, enabling more lenses
to be packed in the array and therefore reducing the time that is
required to complete a full scan. Furthermore, crosstalk could be
reduced by using a collimator/condenser lens in order minimize the
divergence angle of the optical rays from the illumination source
[29]. We envision that the proposed imaging system can be used for
general purpose imaging of biological specimens for the diagnosis
and monitoring of a wide variety of diseases and conditions at the
point of care.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Ning Gulari for useful discussions and
for fabricating the silicon chip of the mini-lens array. Funding was
provided by the ERC Starting Grant (project ID 693433) under the
Horizon 2020 program.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary material related to this article can be found,
in the online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sna.2018.06.
034.
References
[1] L. Frost, M. Reich, Access: How Do Good Health Technologies Get to Poor
People in Poor Countries? Harvard Center for Population and Development
Studies, Cambridge, 2008.
[2] K. Davis, S.C. Schoenbaum, A.-M. Audet, A 2020 vision of patient-centered
primary care J. Gen. Intern. Med. 20 (2005) 953–957.
[3] C. Price, A.S. John, Point of Care Testing: Making Innovation for
Patient-Centered Care, AACC Press, Washington, USA, 2012.
[4] N. Tangpukdee, C. Duangdee, P. W, S. K, Malaria diagnosis: a brief review,
Korean J. Parasitol. 47 (no. 2) (2009) 93–102.
[5] A. Moody, Rapid diagnostic tests for malaria parasites, Clin. Microbiol. Rev. 15
(1) (2002) 66–78.
[6] M. Usdin, M. Guillerm, A. Calmy, Patient needs and point-of-care
requirements for HIV load testing in Resource-limited settings, J. Infect. Dis.
(2010) 201.
[7] K. Steingart, V. Ng, M. Henry, P. Hopewell, A. Ramsay, J. Cunningham, R.
Urbanczik, M. Perkins, M. Aziz, M. Pai, Sputum processing methods to
improve the sensitivity of smear microscopy for tuberculosis: a systematic
review, Lancet Infect. Dis. 6 (2006) 664–674.
[8] H. Zhua, S.O. Isikmana, O. Mudanyalia, A. Greenbauma, A. Ozcan, Optical
imaging techniques for point-of-care diagnostics, Lab Chip 13 (1) (2013)
51–67.
[9] G. Wu, M.H. Zaman, Low-cost tools for diagnosing and monitoring HIV
infection in low-resource settings, Bull. World Health Organ. 90 (2012)
914–920.
[10] F. Ghaznavi, A. Evans, A. Madabhushi, M. Feldman, Digital imaging in
pathology: whole slide imaging and bejond, Annu. Rev. Pathol. Mech. Dis. 8
(2013) 331–359.
[11] G. Huang, C. Deng, J. Zhu, S. Xu, C. Han, X. Song, X. Yang, Digital imaging
scanning system and biomedical applications for biochips, J. Biomed. Opt. 13
(3) (2008).
[12] R. Weinstein, M. Descour, C. Liang, G. Barker, K. Scott, L. Richter, E. Krupinski,
A. Bhattacharyya, J. Davis, A. Graham, M. Rennels, W. Russum, J. Goodall, P.
Zhou, A. Olszak, B. Williams, J. Wyant, P. Bartels, An array microscope for
ultrarapid virtual slide processing and telepathology. Design, fabrication, and
validation study, Hum. Pathol. 35 (11) (2004).
[13] S. Moon, H.O. Keles, Y.-G. Kim, D. Kuritzkes, U. Demirci, Lensless imaging for
Point-of-care testing, Conf. Proc. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. (2009) 6376–6379.
[14] A. Ozcan, U. Demirci, Ultra wide-field lens-free monitoring of cells on-chip,
Lab Chip 8 (1) (2008) 98–106.
[15] O. Mudanyali, W. Bishara, A. Ozcan, Lensfree super-resolution holographic
microscopy using wetting films on a chip, Opt. Express 19 (18) (2011)
17378–17389.
[16] A. Greenbaum, W. Luo, T.-W. Su, Z. Göröcs, L. Xue, S. OIsikman, A. Coskun, O.
Mudanyali, A. Ozcan, Imaging without lenses: achievements and remaining
challenges of wide-field on-chip microscopy, Nat. Methods 9 (9) (2012)
889–895.
[17] D.N. Breslauer, R.N. Maamari, N.A. Switz, W.A. Lam, D.A. Fletcher, Mobile
phone based clinical microscopy for global health applications, PLoS One 4 (7)
(2009).
[18] A. Skandarajah, C. Reber, N. Switz, D. Fletcher, Quantitative imaging with a
mobile phone microscope, Plos One 9 (5) (2014).
[19] A. Boppart, R. Richards-Kortum, Point-of-care and point-of-procedure optical
imaging technologies for primary care and global health, Sci. Transl. Med. 6
(253) (2014).
[20] M.N. Gulari, A. Tripathi, N. Chronis, Microfluidic-based oil-immersion lenses
for high resolution microscopy, in: 16th International Conference on
Miniaturized Systems for Chemistry and Life Sciences, Okinawa, Japan,
October 28 – November 1, 2012.
[21] E. Peli, Contrast in complex images, J. Opt. Soc. Am. 7 (10) (1990) 2032–2040.
[22] F. Helmli, S. Scherer, Adaptive shape from focus with an error estimation in
light microscopy, in: Image and Signal Processing and Analysis (ISPA), Pula,
Croatia, 2001.
[23] A. Santos, C.O.d. Solorzano, J.J. Vaquero, J. Rena, N. Malpica, F.d. Pozo,
Evaluation of autofocus functions in molecular cytogenetic analysis, J.
Microsc. 188 (3) (1997) 264–272.
[24] Y. Sun, S. Duthaler, B. Nelson, Autofocusing in computer microscopy:
selecting the optimal focus algorithm, Microsc. Res. Tech. 65 (2004) 139–149.
[25] J. Tanida, T. Kumagai, K. Yamada, S. Miyatake, K. Ishida, T. Morimoto, N.
Kondou, D. Miyazaki, Y. Ichioka, Thin observation module by bound optics
(TOMBO): concept and experimental verification, Appl. Opt. 40 (11) (2001)
1806–1813.
[26] J. Lee, J. Kim, G. Koo, C. Kim, D. Shin, J. Sim, Y. Won, Analysis and reduction of
crosstalk in the liquid lenticular lens array, IEEE Photonics J. 9 (3) (2017).
[27] Y. Zheng, M. Grossman, S.P. Awate, J.C. Gee, Automatic correction of intensity
nonuniformity from sparseness of gradient distribution in medical images,
Med. Image Comput. Comput. Assist. Interv. 12 (2) (2009) 852–859.
[28] F. Sadeghian, Z. Seman, A.R. Ramli, B.H.A. Kahar, M. Saripan, A framework for
white blood cell segmentation in microscopic blood images using digital
image processing, Biol. Proc. Online 11 (1) (2009) 196–206.
[29] J.F. Ribeiro, A.C. Costa, J.M. Gomes, C.G. Costa, S.B. Goncalves, R.F.
Wolffenbuttel, J.H. Correia, PDMS microlenses for optical biopsy
microsystems, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 64 (12) (2017) 9683–9690.
Biographies
G. Korompili holds a diploma in Electrical and Electronic Engineering from National
Technical University of Athens. Right after graduation, she has been occupied in
the field of systems and data acquisition for various applications, including a 2-
year fellowship at CERN. In 2012 she joined the Institute of Nanoscience and
Nanotechnology of the N.C.S.R. Demokritos and particularly the laboratory of Micro-
electromechanical systems for biological applications (bioMEMS). Since 2014 she is
a PhD candidate in the University of Crete – Department of Material Science – in
the field of bioMEMS, under supervision of prof. Chronis Nikos. Her research inter-
ests focus on the design and construction of bio-imaging and microscopy platforms,
 G. Korompili et al. / Sensors and Actuators A 279 (2018) 367–375
micro-optics systems, microflidic systems as well as automated microsystems for
various biological applications.
G.P. Kanakaris is a Mechanical Engineer specializing in mechanical design and
biotechnology instrument development. He has acquired his M.Sc. from the National
Technical University of Athens, 2011. His research interests include high through-
put proteomic measurement platforms as well as Point of Care Systems for in vitro
diagnostics. He is currently a PhD candidate in the field of proteomic measurement
technologies.
C. Ampatis is a mechanical engineer with specialization in aeronautics, control
systems and robotics. He holds two M.Sc. diplomas in the aforementioned fields,
acquired from National Technical University of Athens during 2010 and 2012 respec-
tively. His research interests include axial compressor design and performance, wind
tunnel design, multi-rotor aerial vehicles design and performance, as well as mecha-
375
tronics and its application on process development and point of care devices. He is
currently working in consumer products industry as product design-prototype and
process development engineer.
Professor Chronis received a Bachelor in Engineering (B.E.) in mechanical engineer-
ing in 1998, from the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki with honors (graduated 1st
out of 145 students in his class). He completed his Ph.D. in mechanical engineering
from the University of California at Berkeley (USA) in 2004. From 2004–2006, he held
a post-doctoral research position at Rockefeller University, New York, (USA). In 2006,
he became a faculty at the Department of Mechanical Engineering at the University
of Michigan, Ann Arbor. He is the co-author of more 60 journal and peer-reviewed
conference publications and inventor in 3 patents. Dr. Chronis is the recipient of the
prestigious NIH Director’s New Innovator Award.