The use of both these materials in microfluidics has been comprehensively discussed in our recent reviews . However, the widespread implementation of devices composed of glass and PDMS has been severely limited by their costly and laboursome fabrication process, poor scalability, and high variability between devices. From a materials perspective, PDMS microfluidic platforms have demonstrated poor surface treatment stability and high susceptibility towards biomolecule adsorption, making them impractical for most biomedical applications . Furthermore, leaching of uncrosslinked oligomers of PDMS could be problematic for cell culture applications . On a more macro-scale, these devices often malfunction under high-pressure conditions, making many postfabrication processing strategies unfeasible. Recent research efforts have thus been directed towards the material optimization of microfluidic devices. To this end, thermoplastic microfluidic platforms have garnered significant interest, given their excellent material properties and low device cost, relative to their glass and PDMS device counterparts. Materials such as poly(methyl methacrylate) (PMMA), cyclic Olefin polymer (COP), cyclic olefin copolymer (COC), polystyrene (PS), polycarbonate (PC), polyethylene glycol (PEG) and polyester terephthalate (PETE) are considered cost-effective thermoplastic polymers for microfluidic fabrications, providing biocompatibility, gas permeability and good optical properties .