Literature DB >> 18692296

Examination of inertial cavitation of Optison in producing sonoporation of chinese hamster ovary cells.

Monica M Forbes1, Ryan L Steinberg, William D O'Brien.   

Abstract

The objective of this project was to elucidate the relationship between ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) and sonoporation. Sonoporation is an ultrasound-induced, transient cell membrane permeability change that allows for the uptake of normally impermeable macromolecules. Specifically, this study will determine the role that inertial cavitation plays in eliciting sonoporation. The inertial cavitation thresholds of the UCA, Optison, are compared directly with the results of sonoporation to determine the involvement of inertial cavitation in sonoporation. Chinese hamster ovary (CHO) cells were exposed as a monolayer in a solution of Optison, 500,000 Da fluorescein isothiocyanate-dextran (FITC-dextran), and phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) to 30 s of pulsed ultrasound at 3.15-MHz center frequency, 5-cycle pulse duration and 10-Hz pulse repetition frequency. The peak rarefactional pressure (P(r)) was varied over a range from 120 kPa-3.5 MPa, and five independent replicates were performed at each pressure. As the P(r) was increased, from 120 kPa-3.5 MPa, the fraction of sonoporated cells among the total viable population increased from 0.63-10.21%, with the maximum occurring at 2.4 MPa. The inertial cavitation threshold for Optison at these exposure conditions has previously been shown to be in the range 0.77-0.83 MPa, at which sonoporation activity was found to be 50% of its maximum level. Furthermore, significant sonoporation activity was observed at pressure levels below the threshold for inertial cavitation of Optison. Above 2.4 MPa, a significant drop in sonoporation activity occurred, corresponding to pressures where >95% of the Optison was collapsing. These results demonstrate that sonoporation is not directly a result of inertial cavitation of the UCA, rather that the effect is related to linear and/or nonlinear oscillation of the UCA occurring at pressure levels below the inertial cavitation threshold.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18692296      PMCID: PMC2610271          DOI: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2008.05.003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol        ISSN: 0301-5629            Impact factor:   2.998


  49 in total

1.  Ultrasound enhancement of liposome-mediated cell transfection is caused by cavitation effects.

Authors:  S Koch; P Pohl; U Cobet; N G Rainov
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 2.998

2.  DNA-loaded albumin microbubbles enhance ultrasound-mediated transfection in vitro.

Authors:  Peter A Frenkel; Shuyuan Chen; To Thai; Ralph V Shohet; Paul A Grayburn
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.998

3.  DNA transfer and cell killing in epidermoid cells by diagnostic ultrasound activation of contrast agent gas bodies in vitro.

Authors:  Douglas L Miller; Chunyan Dou; Jianming Song
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2003-04       Impact factor: 2.998

Review 4.  Incorporation of macromolecules into living cells.

Authors:  P L Mcneil
Journal:  Methods Cell Biol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 1.441

5.  Vascular effects induced by combined 1-MHz ultrasound and microbubble contrast agent treatments in vivo.

Authors:  Joo Ha Hwang; Andrew A Brayman; Michael A Reidy; Thomas J Matula; Michael B Kimmey; Lawrence A Crum
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 2.998

6.  The onset of microbubble vibration.

Authors:  Marcia Emmer; Annemieke van Wamel; Dave E Goertz; Nico de Jong
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2007-04-23       Impact factor: 2.998

7.  Transdermal delivery of poly-l-lysine by sonomacroporation.

Authors:  Ludwig J Weimann; Junru Wu
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2002-09       Impact factor: 2.998

8.  The use of sonication for the efficient delivery of plasmid DNA into cells.

Authors:  J A Wyber; J Andrews; A D'Emanuele
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 4.200

9.  Hemolysis near an ultrasonically pulsating gas bubble.

Authors:  J A Rooney
Journal:  Science       Date:  1970-08-28       Impact factor: 47.728

10.  In vitro mechanisms of chemopotentiation by tone-burst ultrasound.

Authors:  G H Harrison; E K Balcer-Kubiczek; P L Gutierrez
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.998

View more
  29 in total

1.  Development of a theoretical model describing sonoporation activity of cells exposed to ultrasound in the presence of contrast agents.

Authors:  Monica M Forbes; William D O'Brien
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.840

2.  Different effects of sonoporation on cell morphology and viability.

Authors:  Ji-Zhen Zhang; Jasdeep K Saggar; Zhao-Li Zhou; Bing Hu
Journal:  Bosn J Basic Med Sci       Date:  2012-05       Impact factor: 3.363

3.  Determination of postexcitation thresholds for single ultrasound contrast agent microbubbles using double passive cavitation detection.

Authors:  Daniel A King; Michael J Malloy; Alayna C Roberts; Alexander Haak; Christian C Yoder; William D O'Brien
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 1.840

Review 4.  Mechanisms of microbubble-facilitated sonoporation for drug and gene delivery.

Authors:  Zhenzhen Fan; Ronald E Kumon; Cheri X Deng
Journal:  Ther Deliv       Date:  2014-04

5.  Production of uniformly sized serum albumin and dextrose microbubbles.

Authors:  Michael J Borrelli; William D O'Brien; Laura J Bernock; Heather R Williams; Eric Hamilton; Jonah Wu; Michael L Oelze; William C Culp
Journal:  Ultrason Sonochem       Date:  2011-05-27       Impact factor: 7.491

6.  Comparison between maximum radial expansion of ultrasound contrast agents and experimental postexcitation signal results.

Authors:  Daniel A King; William D O'Brien
Journal:  J Acoust Soc Am       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 1.840

7.  Acoustic Cavitation-Mediated Delivery of Small Interfering Ribonucleic Acids with Phase-Shift Nano-Emulsions.

Authors:  Mark T Burgess; Tyrone M Porter
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2015-05-13       Impact factor: 2.998

8.  Markedly enhanced skeletal muscle transfection achieved by the ultrasound-targeted delivery of non-viral gene nanocarriers with microbubbles.

Authors:  Caitlin W Burke; Jung Soo Suk; Anthony J Kim; Yu-Han J Hsiang; Alexander L Klibanov; Justin Hanes; Richard J Price
Journal:  J Control Release       Date:  2012-07-16       Impact factor: 9.776

9.  Gauging the likelihood of stable cavitation from ultrasound contrast agents.

Authors:  Kenneth B Bader; Christy K Holland
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-12-07       Impact factor: 3.609

10.  Quantitative analysis of ultrasound contrast agent postexcitation collapse.

Authors:  Daniel A King; William D O'Brien
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2014-07       Impact factor: 2.725

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.