Design History and Alternatives 

Sensor Integration – Valuable but Out of Scope: While sensors offered real-time feedback and improved stimulation accuracy, their integration was ultimately unfeasible within project constraints. Including them now would divert time and resources, but future iterations may benefit from their qualitative insights.

6-Well Plate Design – Excessive for Current Needs: Although a 6-well setup increases experimental variability and data collection, its complexity and cost outweigh the benefits. A streamlined 3-well system was prioritized to reduce implementation burden and material waste.

Light-Based Pacing – Technically Impractical: Despite its efficiency and precision, light-based pacing requires genetically modified cells and risks light interference across wells. The biological cost of gene editing, combined with equipment complexity, made this approach unsuitable and potentially wasteful.

External Pacing Device – Practical and Sustainable: The selected design uses an external device with silver electrodes, providing adjustable stimulation without complicating the platform. Its removability ensures flexibility, reducing unnecessary modifications and preserving resources.

Versatility – Minimizing Experimental Waste: The ability to toggle electrical stimulation enables broader application and reuse. This modularity limits redundant fabrication and allows for targeted experimental conditions without excessive material use.