Abstract
Porous microneedles (MNs) offer broad advantages such as fluid capture and filtration. Compared to hollow MNs, fluid injection through porous MNs causes a broader diffusion spread. Herein, three MN designs with a constant pore size and controlled pore locations are fabricated and compared, using two‐photon polymerization (2PP), by examining factors such as diffusion spread, mixing capabilities, and mechanical resilience. Results show that the porous MN can cover 16 times the injection area than that of the hollow MN. Porous MNs also show good mixing capabilities with two fluids. Mechanical compression results reveal that one porous MN can withstand a load of 0.6 N.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
