Literature DB >> 17153139

Whole genome expression profiling using DNA microarray for determining biocompatibility of polymeric surfaces.

Michael Stangegaard1, Z Wang, J P Kutter, M Dufva, A Wolff.   

Abstract

There is an ever increasing need to find surfaces that are biocompatible for applications like medical implants and microfluidics-based cell culture systems. The biocompatibility of five different surfaces with different hydrophobicity was determined using gene expression profiling as well as more conventional methods to determine biocompatibility such as cellular growth rate, morphology and the hydrophobicity of the surfaces. HeLa cells grown on polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) or a SU-8 surface treated with HNO3-ceric ammonium nitrate (HNO3-CAN) and ethanolamine showed no differences in growth rate, morphology or gene expression profiles as compared to HeLa cells grown in cell culture flasks. Cells grown on SU-8 treated with only HNO3-CAN showed almost the same growth rate (36 +/- 1 h) and similar morphology as cells grown in cell culture flasks (32 +/- 1 h), indicating good biocompatibility. However, more than 200 genes showed different expression levels in cells grown on SU-8 treated with HNO3-CAN compared to cells grown in cell culture flasks. This shows that gene expression profiling is a simple and precise method for determining differences in cells grown on different surfaces that are otherwise difficult to find using conventional methods. It is particularly noteworthy that no correlation was found between surface hydrophobicity and biocompatibility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 17153139     DOI: 10.1039/b608239d

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Biosyst        ISSN: 1742-2051


  7 in total

1.  Complex three-dimensional high aspect ratio microfluidic network manufactured in combined PerMX dry-resist and SU-8 technology.

Authors:  Robert Ch Meier; Vlad Badilita; Jens Brunne; Ulrike Wallrabe; Jan G Korvink
Journal:  Biomicrofluidics       Date:  2011-08-05       Impact factor: 2.800

2.  Contact printing of arrayed microstructures.

Authors:  Wei Xu; Alicia M Luikart; Christopher E Sims; Nancy L Allbritton
Journal:  Anal Bioanal Chem       Date:  2010-04-28       Impact factor: 4.142

Review 3.  From the cellular perspective: exploring differences in the cellular baseline in macroscale and microfluidic cultures.

Authors:  Amy L Paguirigan; David J Beebe
Journal:  Integr Biol (Camb)       Date:  2009-01-08       Impact factor: 2.192

Review 4.  Microfluidics meet cell biology: bridging the gap by validation and application of microscale techniques for cell biological assays.

Authors:  Amy L Paguirigan; David J Beebe
Journal:  Bioessays       Date:  2008-09       Impact factor: 4.345

5.  Optimal homogenization of perfusion flows in microfluidic bio-reactors: a numerical study.

Authors:  Fridolin Okkels; Martin Dufva; Henrik Bruus
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2011-01-27       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Effect of the Addition Frequency of 5-Azacytidine in Both Micro- and Macroscale Cultures.

Authors:  Sandeep Kadekar; Laurent Barbe; Martin Stoddart; Oommen P Varghese; Maria Tenje; Gemma Mestres
Journal:  Cell Mol Bioeng       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 2.321

7.  Poly(dimethylsiloxane) (PDMS) affects gene expression in PC12 cells differentiating into neuronal-like cells.

Authors:  Joanna M Łopacińska; Jenny Emnéus; Martin Dufva
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-01-03       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.