Francesco E Angilè1, Kevin B Vargo, Chandra M Sehgal, Daniel A Hammer, Daeyeon Lee. 1. Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering and ‡Department of Bioengineering, School of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Pennsylvania , Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104, United States.
Abstract
Microbubbles are used as contrast enhancing agents in ultrasound sonography and more recently have shown great potential as theranostic agents that enable both diagnostics and therapy. Conventional production methods lead to highly polydisperse microbubbles, which compromise the effectiveness of ultrasound imaging and therapy. Stabilizing microbubbles with surfactant molecules that can impart functionality and properties that are desirable for specific applications would enhance the utility of microbubbles. Here we generate monodisperse microbubbles with a large potential for functionalization by combining a microfluidic method and recombinant protein technology. Our microfluidic device uses an air-actuated membrane valve that enables production of monodisperse microbubbles with narrow size distribution. The size of microbubbles can be precisely tuned by dynamically changing the dimension of the channel using the valve. The microbubbles are stabilized by an amphiphilic protein, oleosin, which provides versatility in controlling the functionalization of microbubbles through recombinant biotechnology. We show that it is critical to control the composition of the stabilizing agents to enable formation of highly stable and monodisperse microbubbles that are echogenic under ultrasound insonation. Our protein-shelled microbubbles based on the combination of microfluidic generation and recombinant protein technology provide a promising platform for ultrasound-related applications.
Microbubbles are used as contrast enhancing agents in ultrasound sonography and more recently have shown great potential as theranostic agents that enable both diagnostics and therapy. Conventional production methods lead to highly polydisperse microbubbles, which compromise the effectiveness of ultrasound imaging and therapy. Stabilizing microbubbles with surfactant molecules that can impart functionality and properties that are desirable for specific applications would enhance the utility of microbubbles. Here we generate monodisperse microbubbles with a large potential for functionalization by combining a microfluidic method and recombinant protein technology. Our microfluidic device uses an air-actuated membrane valve that enables production of monodisperse microbubbles with narrow size distribution. The size of microbubbles can be precisely tuned by dynamically changing the dimension of the channel using the valve. The microbubbles are stabilized by an amphiphilic protein, oleosin, which provides versatility in controlling the functionalization of microbubbles through recombinant biotechnology. We show that it is critical to control the composition of the stabilizing agents to enable formation of highly stable and monodisperse microbubbles that are echogenic under ultrasound insonation. Our protein-shelled microbubbles based on the combination of microfluidic generation and recombinant protein technology provide a promising platform for ultrasound-related applications.
Ultrasound imaging is
one of the most inexpensive, safe, and commonly
used diagnostic tools for imaging soft tissues and vasculature.[1] The use of microbubble contrast agents enables
visualization of microvasculature which cannot be seen directly with
Doppler ultrasound. Microbubbles composed of gaseous cores covered
with stabilizing agents can drastically enhance the ultrasound signal
because of their large compressibility, which leads to enhanced scattering
of ultrasound.[2] The echogenicity of microbubbles
coupled with their physical interactions with acoustic energy can
also be used for triggered release of active agents or for conversion
of acoustic energy to thermal energy to enable therapeutic applications.
For example, recent studies have shown that the insonation of microbubbles
with low-intensity ultrasound can lead to a localized temperature
increase, which in turn disrupts tumor vasculature (also known as
antivascular ultrasound therapy), enabling a minimally invasive procedure
to disrupt cancerous tissues. These properties of microbubbles make
them ideal candidates for theranostics; that is, the same microbubble
agents can be used for diagnostics and therapeutic applications.[3]Currently available commercial agents consist
of polydisperse microbubbles
with size distributed over a broad range of diameters. Studies have
shown that the effectiveness of these agents can be significantly
enhanced by making the size distribution narrow for molecular imaging
and therapeutic applications.[4−7] Although some methods to fractionate microbubbles
to enhance the uniformity of size have been reported, these techniques
inevitably lead to loss of significant fraction of bubbles.[4,8] Another important factor that significantly affects microbubble
properties for ultrasound-related applications is the surfactant that
is used to stabilize microbubbles. An approach to control the molecular
structure and properties of these surfactants would be highly beneficial
because their structure affects the surface functionality and the
echogenicity of microbubbles. The generation of monodisperse microbubbles
that are stabilized with surfactants that can be precisely designed
and controlled would lead to microbubbles that have ideal functionality
for ultrasound imaging and novel therapeutic approaches such as targeted
drug delivery and antivascular ultrasound therapy (AVUST).[9−15]In this study, we present a method to create stable protein-shelled
microbubbles using a microfluidic flow focusing device that uses an
air-actuated membrane valve, which enables the production of highly
monodisperse sub-10 μm microbubbles. Although other studies
have shown that monodispserse bubbles can be generated based on microfluidic
techniques,[16−19] the size range of microbubbles that can be generated from such devices
is somewhat limited. A method based on the dissolution of highly soluble
gas such as CO2 in a long microfluidic channel has shown
to generate monodisperse bubbles of varying sizes.[20] A method that enables the formation of bubbles over a wide
range of size without using soluble gas and long channels would provide
a complementary method that can further expand the use of microfluidic
techniques to generate monodisperse microbubbles. The air-actuated
membrane valve enables precise control over the size of microbubbles
while producing highly monodisperse microbubbles. To stabilize the
microbubbles generated by the microfluidic technique, we use a novel
mutant of the amphiphilic protein oleosin.[21,22] Unlike common proteins that have been used to stabilize microbubbles,[20,23,24] oleosin potentially provides
versatility in imparting additional functionality via recombinant
protein technology.[22,25] We demonstrate an example of
such modularity by expressing and incorporating fluorescent oleosin
into the microbubble shell. We demonstrate that careful tuning of
the composition of the stabilizing agents is critical in the formation
of highly stable and monodisperse microbubbles that are echogenic
under ultrasound insonation.
Materials
and Methods
Microfluidic Device Fabrication
Microfluidic flow focusing
devices with expanding nozzle design (Figure 1a) are fabricated using single layer soft lithography in poly(dimethylsiloxane)
(PDMS).[26,27] Negative photoresist SU-8 2010 (Microchem,
Newton, MA), thinned to a 3:1 ratio with SU-8 developer, is spin-coated
onto a clean silicon wafer to a thickness of 5 μm and patterned
to UV light through a transparency photomask (CAD/Art Service, Bandon,
OR) using a Karl Suss MA4 Mask Aligner (SUSS MicroTec Inc., Sunnyvale,
CA). To incorporate an air-actuated valve, we use single-layer membrane
valves,[28] which exist in the same plane
as the microfluidic channel, allowing us to fabricate the entire microfluidic
device in a single layer mold. Sylgard 184 poly(dimethylsiloxane)
(Dow Corning, Midland, MI) is mixed with cross-linker (ratio 12:1),
degassed thoroughly and poured onto the photoresist pattern, and cured
for 1 h at 65 °C to make the membrane highly compliant. The PDMS
replica are peeled off the wafer and bonded to a PDMS membrane fabricated
by spin-coating PDMS on a glass slide after oxygen plasma activation
of both surfaces. Having a microchannel fully enclosed in PDMS allows
for more efficient use of the valve membrane.
Figure 1
(a) Schematic illustration
of a PDMS microfluidic device used to
generate monodisperse microbubbles of different sizes. (b) Cross-sectional
geometry of the nozzle (see Figure S1 for
junction dimensions). (c) Schematic of a microbubble stabilized with
a mixture of oleosin and (PEO)-(PPO)-(PEO) triblock
copolymer.
(a) Schematic illustration
of a PDMS microfluidic device used to
generate monodisperse microbubbles of different sizes. (b) Cross-sectional
geometry of the nozzle (see Figure S1 for
junction dimensions). (c) Schematic of a microbubble stabilized with
a mixture of oleosin and (PEO)-(PPO)-(PEO) triblock
copolymer.
Gene Creation and Protein
Expression
The sunflower
seed oleosin gene is provided as a gift from Dr. Beaudoin at Rothamsted
Research, Hampshire, England. Multiple rounds of PCR are used to create
the oleosin gene 42-30G-63 and eGFP-30G-63. The genes are inserted
into the expression vector pBamUK, a pET series derivative constructed
by the Duyne Laboratory (SOM, Penn). Cloning details can be found
in the Supporting Information. Mutants
are confirmed through DNA sequencing prior to protein expression.
pBamUK adds a 6-histidine tag to the C-terminus of the protein for
IMAC purification. Protein is expressed in the E. coli strain BL21 DE3 (Stratagene) controlled by the lac
promoter. Cultures are grown at 37 °C in Luria Bertani (LB) with
kanamycin (50 μg mL–1) until OD600 ≈ 0.7–0.9. Protein expression is induced with isopropyl
β-d-1-thiogalactopyranoside (IPTG) to a final concentration
of 1.0 mM. Cells are harvested by centrifugation, and cell pellets
are frozen at −20 °C prior to purification.
Protein Purification
and Characterization
B-PER protein
extraction agent (Fisher Scientific) is used for protein purification.
42-30G-63 is expressed in inclusion bodies whereas eGFP-42-30G-63
is expressed in the soluble fraction of the cell. 42-30G-63 is purified
according to the B-PER protocol for inclusion bodies, and eGFP-42-30G-63
is purified according to the protocol for soluble proteins. Detailed
purification information can be found in the Supporting
Information. The concentration of purified protein is measured
with a Nano-Drop 1000 (Thermo Scientific). Buffer exchange is completed
with dialysis. All analysis is completed in PBS unless otherwise noted.
To establish the purity of the proteins, SDS/PAGE gels are run on
NuPAGE Novex 4–12% Bis-Tris mini gels (Invitrogen) in MES buffer.
The gel is stained with SimplyBlue SafeStain (Invitrogen) following
electrophoresis. The gel is destained overnight in water and imaged
with a Kodak Gel Logic 100 imaging system. Protein molecular weight
is confirmed with MALDI-TOF. Sample spots are created with 0.5 μL
protein in 1× PBS and 0.5 μL of saturated sinapinic acid
solution (50/50 acetonitrile/water + 0.1% TFE). Spectra are collected
on an Ultraflextreme MALDI-TOF (Bruker, Billerica, MA) (see Figure S5 for eGFP spectra). To measure the protein
secondary structure, far-UV CD spectra are collected at 25 °C
on an AVIV 410 spectrometer (AVIV Biomedical Inc.) using a 1 mm quartz
cell. Protein concentration is 15 μM in 50 mM phosphate, 140
mM NaF. NaF is used to replace NaCl due to the strong absorbance of
the Cl– ion.
Microbubbles Production
and Characterization
The liquid
phase containing the shell material consists of oleosin or a solution
containing oleosin proteins and (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 or (PEO)100-(PPO)65-(PEO)100 diluted in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) (pH 7.2, Sigma-Aldrich,
St. Louis, MO). The components are mixed together to the desired concentration.
Microbubbles are generated using liquid phases containing different
combinations of the three components. The liquid phase consisting
of oleosin and (PEO)-(PPO)-(PEO) triblock copolymers
at the optimal concentration dispersed in PBS is supplied to the device
using a syringe pump (Harvard Apparatus PHD Ultra) at flow rates between
500 and 1000 μL h–1. To connect the channels
to syringes, polyethylene tubing with an i.d. of 0.38 mm and an o.d.
of 1.09 mm (BB31695-PE/2, Scientific Commodities Inc, Lake Havasu
City, AZ) is used. The gas phase consists of 99.999% pure nitrogen
gas (N2, GTS Welco, Richmond, VA) or octafluorocyclobutane
(C4F8) (SynQuest Laboratories, Alachua, FL)
supplied to the device using a pressure regulator (Type 700, ControlAir
Inc., Amhrest, NH) at pressures between 15 and 20 psi. Polyethylene
tubing with an i.d. of 0.86 mm and an o.d. of 1.32 mm (BB31695-PE/5,
Scientific Commodities Inc, Lake Havasu City, AZ) is used connect
the channel to the pressure regulator. The membrane valve is actuated
using a dual-valve pressure controller (PCD-100PSIG-D-PCV10, Alicat
Scientific, Tucson, AZ) at pressure between 0 and 40 psi.Microbubbles
are produced by first applying a small pressure to the gas inlet (2–4
psi) immediately followed by injecting the liquid phase at the desired
flow rate (500–1000 μL h–1). The gas
pressure is then increased slowly until steady state of bubble generation
is reached. Images of microbubbles production are captured using an
inverted microscope (Nikon Diaphot 300) connected to a high speed
Phantom V7 camera. For microbubbles that remain stable during generation
and collection, long-term stability is characterized by collecting
microbubbles at the air–water interface in 35 mm Petri dishes,
acquiring images under an upright microscope (Carl Zeiss Axio Plan
II) connected to a QImaging Retiga 2000R camera. Microbubbles diameter
variation over time is measured and images are analyzed using ImageJ
(v 1.47v, NIH).
Fourier Transform Infrared (FT-IR) Spectroscopy
A Nicolet
8700 FT-IR spectrophotometer (Thermo Scientific) is used to obtain
the FT-IR spectra of microbubbles and their constituent solutions
on ZnSe windows (Phoenix Infrared, Lowell, MA). Samples are prepared
by placing a small aliquot of solution on top of the window and are
fully dried before measurements are performed. The spectra are taken
between 5000 and 600 cm–1, at 1.93 cm–1 wavenumber resolution.
Ultrasound Imaging
Microbubbles
for ultrasonic imaging
are collected and imaged directly in 16 mm membrane dialysis bag,
which is prefilled with buffer solution and sealed at one end. After
a desired amount of bubbles is collected, the tube is sealed at the
other end, carefully avoiding formations of air pockets. The collected
microbubbles are imaged using a clinical ultrasound scanner HDI 5000
(Phillips/ATL, Bothell, WA) which is equipped with a broadband high-frequency
ultrasound transducer at 7–15 MHz. Grayscale B-mode images
are acquired with a mechanical index (MI) of 0.37 and 0.47 with focus
between 0.5–1.5 and 1–2 cm, respectively. Time gain
compensation (TGC) is fixed throughout the experiments.
Results and Discussion
For a variety of applications
that involve microbubbles and ultrasound,
the size distribution of microbubble agents drastically influences
the efficacy of the image contrast enhancement and therapeutic methods.
To enable formation of microbubbles with high monodispersity and,
at the same time, tunable size, we use an expanding nozzle flow-focusing
microfluidic device with a single-layer membrane valve at the orifice
as schematically illustrated in Figure 1. A
previous study has shown that the size of liquid emulsion droplets
produced by a flow-focusing microfluidic device can be controlled
by changing the size of the orifice via the actuation of the valve.[28] Likewise, this design gives us the flexibility
to tune the size of gas microbubbles in the same chip without changing
the continuous phase or gas flow rates, by only changing the size
of the orifice through the application of pressure to the valve. Furthermore,
the use of the single-layer membrane valve overcomes the low resolution
that is typically achieved by using polymeric photomasks (smallest
feature ∼10 μm).For the initial testing of the
microfluidic device to control the
size of microbubbles, we use nitrogen gas and a common surfactant,
sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS, Sigma-Aldrich, St. Louis, MO), at a concentration
of 20 mg mL–1 in the aqueous phase to stabilize
microbubbles. We are able to produce monodisperse microbubbles with
radius ranging from approximately 2 to 10 μm for several hours
without changes in the bubble size. An advantage of this microfluidic
device is that the size of microbubbles that can be generated from
a single microfluidic device can be controlled over a wide range,
unlike most flow-focusing microfluidic devices that have limited range
of size control.[29,30] By increasing the pressure that
is applied to the single-layer valve, we can control the size of the
nozzle and, in turn, the size of microbubbles as shown in Figure 2. We observe that the diameter of the microbubbles, db, decreases linearly with the width of the
nozzle, wn. Interestingly, the microbubble
generation frequency (f = the number of microbubbles
generated per second) is inversely proportional to the volume of microbubbles
as shown in the inset of Figure 2b (f ∼ db–3).[31] Such a trend indicates that the gas
flow rate, calculated to be Qg ∼
62 μL h–1 (σ2 = 8.4 μL
h–1), remains more or less constant under varying
nozzle size. The constant gas flow rate under varying nozzle width
may be attributed to the change in the cross-sectional shape of the
channel, from a horizontal slit to a square or hourglass shape. Although
SDS enables the investigation of microfluidic device performance,
microbubbles formed using SDS are not stable upon collection.
Figure 2
(a1–a9)
Series of micrographs of the microfluidic device
during the generation of microbubbles using a solution containing
SDS at a concentration of 20 mg mL–1 in the aqueous
phase. By changing the size of the nozzle, which is controlled by
an air-actuated valve placed at the orifice, it is possible to generate
uniform microbubbles of different sizes. (b) Effect of orifice width
on the size of microbubbles. The inset shows the microbubbles generation
frequency (f) vs volume of microbubbles (db–3). The linear relationship
between the two quantities indicates that the gas flow rates remains
more or less constant under varying nozzle size.
(a1–a9)
Series of micrographs of the microfluidic device
during the generation of microbubbles using a solution containing
SDS at a concentration of 20 mg mL–1 in the aqueous
phase. By changing the size of the nozzle, which is controlled by
an air-actuated valve placed at the orifice, it is possible to generate
uniform microbubbles of different sizes. (b) Effect of orifice width
on the size of microbubbles. The inset shows the microbubbles generation
frequency (f) vs volume of microbubbles (db–3). The linear relationship
between the two quantities indicates that the gas flow rates remains
more or less constant under varying nozzle size.To produce stable microbubbles with high monodispersity,
size tunability,
and structural modularity, we use recombinant oleosin as the bubble
shell material. Oleosin is a plant protein that stabilizes oil bodies
in seeds.[21] The protein has a natural amphiphilic
structure with N- and C-terminal hydrophilic arms and a central hydrophobic
core containing a proline knot forcing the protein into a hairpin
structure.[21,22,32,33] Oleosin has been used in various biotechnology
and biomedical applications exploiting its amphiphilic properties.[34−38] In its native state, the solubility of oleosin in water is extremely
low. Eliminating a large portion of the hydrophobic domain and removing
the majority of the secondary structure in the protein backbone have
been shown to yield a oleosin mutant that becomes highly soluble in
water and naturally self-assembles into micelles.[25] The soluble oleosin mutant is named 42-30-63 defining the
number of amino acids in each domain: the N-terminal hydrophilic arm,
the central hydrophobic core, and the C-terminal hydrophilic arm,
respectively. This molecule is produced by truncating the wild-type
molecule without changes in the sequence of amino acids. The 42-30-63
oleosin mutant is further modified by inserting five glycines into
the hydrophobic core (see Supporting Information for protein sequences) creating a mutant we refer to as 42-30G-63.[22] The protein is expressed in the Escherichia
coli strain BL21 (DE3) with isopropyl β-d-1-thiogalactopyranoside
(IPTG) induction. Protein is purified using immobilized metal affinity
chromatography through a 6-histidine tag on the C-terminus of the
protein, leading to highly purified products (Figure 3). Protein molecular weight is confirmed with SDS-polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis (SDS-PAGE) and matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization-time-of-flight
(MALDI-TOF) mass spectroscopy (Figure 3). The
addition of the five glycines to the 42-30-63 mutant increases the
protein expression, stability, and solubility while abolishing secondary
structure, as shown by circular dichroism (Figure 3). In contrast, the CD spectra of wild-type (WT) oleosin shows
β-sheet character as previously reported (see Supporting Information for detailed analysis).[22]
Figure 3
(a) SDS-PAGE gel showing >95% purity for 42-30G-63.
(b) MADLI-TOF
spectra confirming the molecular weight for 42-30G-63 (expected: 15 027;
measured: 15 025). (c) Far-ultraviolet circular dichroism (UV
CD) spectra of 42-30G-63 and wild-type oleosin. The former indicates
a random coil structure.
(a) SDS-PAGE gel showing >95% purity for 42-30G-63.
(b) MADLI-TOF
spectra confirming the molecular weight for 42-30G-63 (expected: 15 027;
measured: 15 025). (c) Far-ultraviolet circular dichroism (UV
CD) spectra of 42-30G-63 and wild-type oleosin. The former indicates
a random coil structure.When we produce microbubbles using oleosin, at concentrations
between
1 and 2 mg mL–1, we can only stabilize bubbles with
radius above 10 μm. During the generation of microbubbles with
radii smaller than 10 μm, bubbles are observed to undergo coalescence
within and outside of the microfluidic device (Figure S2). In addition, the relatively high surface tension
between the liquid and the gas phases makes the generation of such
microbubbles challenging, often resulting instability of microbubbles
in the microfluidic device.Interestingly, a number of microbubble
systems that are currently
being investigated (e.g., phospholipid-stabilized microbubbles) often
have extra components such as poly(ethylene glycol)-based surfactants
such as amphiphilic triblock copolymers to enhance the microbubble
stability and generation process. Thus, we add widely used poly(ethylene
glycol)-b-poly(propylene glycol)-b-poly(ethylene glycol)triblock copolymers ((PEO)-(PPO)-(PEO) where n and m denote the
number of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide repeat units, respectively;
these polymers are also known as Pluronic and Polxamer) to the oleosin
solution to test whether the production of microbubbles can be facilitated.[39] We test two different types of (PEO)-(PPO)-(PEO) triblock copolymers: (PEO)100-(PPO)65-(PEO)100 and (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. When we use a mixture containing 1–2
mg mL–1 oleosin and 5–20 mg mL–1 (PEO)100-(PPO)65-(PEO)100 (average
molecular weight 12 600), we are able to consistently generate
monodisperse microbubbles at the nozzle; however, these microbubbles
undergo significant coalescence upon collection. In contrast, when
we add (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 (average
molecular weight 8400) to oleosin solutions, we are able to generate
microbubbles at the nozzle and very limited coalescence is observed
upon collection. We find that the optimal concentration for stable
microbubble formation requires an aqueous phase containing 1 mg mL–1 of oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 of (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 is known to be more effective
in stabilizing gas bubbles than (PEO)100-(PPO)65-(PEO)100, which may explain the effectiveness of the
former in facilitating the microbubble production.[40]To further understand the possible role of (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 in facilitating the
formation of microbubbles
and the role of oleosin in imparting long-term stability to microbubbles,
we perform FT-IR spectroscopy of four different samples: pure oleosin,
pure (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78, a mixture
of oleosin and (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 with the same composition as the solution used for microbubble generation
(1:18 mole ratio), and microbubbles. FT-IR spectra remarkably show
that the composition of microbubble shell is very different from that
of the solution as shown in Figure 4. The concentration
of oleosin present in the microbubble shell is significantly higher
than that of the original solution used for microbubble generation,
as evidenced by the prominent presence of peaks associated with pure
oleosin in the microbubble spectrum (e.g., peaks found around 1535,
1650, and 3290 cm–1). Although it is not straightforward
to quantify the composition of the microbubble shell based on FT-IR,
the comparison of the four spectra shows that oleosin seems to be
the major species that is stabilizing microbubbles. These results
suggest that (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 present in the solution facilitates microbubble production by lowering
the surface tension and rapidly covering the microbubbles upon breakup
at the nozzle. Once microbubbles are generated and flow through the
channel, oleosin starts to adsorb and possibly displace some of (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 that are on the microbubble
surface.
Figure 4
FTIR absorbance spectra of the components utilized to produce the
bubbles and microbubbles. The spectra of pure oleosin and microbubbles
are amplified by factors of 2.5 and 5, respectively, to clearly show
the features.
FTIR absorbance spectra of the components utilized to produce the
bubbles and microbubbles. The spectra of pure oleosin and microbubbles
are amplified by factors of 2.5 and 5, respectively, to clearly show
the features.Micrographs of microbubbles
produced using a solution containing
1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. (a) A small number of large bubbles are present upon collection
via plastic tubing. (b) Big bubbles disappear 24 h after collection,
leaving monodisperse microbubbles.In the samples that are collected through polyethylene tubing,
we typically observe that there are a small number of fairly large
bubbles (>20 μm in diameter). Although the physical mechanism
behind the appearance of these large bubbles is not known, their number
fraction is extremely small, typically less than 1%. Interestingly,
these large bubbles disappear completely approximately 24 h after
collection, leaving behind a collection of highly monodisperse microbubbles
as shown in Figure 5. We believe these large
bubbles dissolve over time. Since we do not see any major coalescence
between microbubbles occurring within the PDMS microfluidic device,
we believe these large bubbles likely form during transfer of the
microbubbles from nozzle to a container via polyethylene tubing. Possibly,
abrupt changes in dimensions and relative shear stress experienced
by microbubbles between the PDMS device and the collection tube as
well as the lower speed at which the microbubbles travel in the polyethyelene
tube before being released in a Petri dish may lead to collision between
bubbles and eventual coalescence. Another possibility is that these
large bubbles have slightly different surface composition since they
are observed to undergo dissolution when they are stored for an extended
period, whereas the monodisperse bubbles that were originally generated
at the nozzle do not dissolve completely over a long period of time.
Interestingly, we are able to collect highly monodisperse microbubbles
without any large bubbles if we collect the produced bubbles straight
into a well that is position in the same plane as the microfluidic
channel (Figure 6). The high monodispersity
of microbubbles is illustrated by their ability to pack into hexagonal
array, which indicates that the coefficient of variation (C) is less than 5% around the
average bubble size, consistent with our optical microscopy-based
analysis. These results show that even small perturbations can lead
to disruption of microbubbles that are generated using microfluidic
devices, and extra care must be taken in collecting microbubbles for
clinical applications since large bubbles in blood vessels can lead
to serious problems such as embolism.
Figure 5
Micrographs of microbubbles
produced using a solution containing
1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. (a) A small number of large bubbles are present upon collection
via plastic tubing. (b) Big bubbles disappear 24 h after collection,
leaving monodisperse microbubbles.
Figure 6
Micrograph of monodisperse microbubbles
produced using a solution
containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10
mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 and collected into a well in the PDMS device without the
use of plastic tubing. The inset shows the microbubble size distribution
for ∼500 microbubbles. μ, σ, and C in the inset represent the average
(in μm), standard deviation (in μm), and coefficient of
variation, respectively.
Micrograph of monodisperse microbubbles
produced using a solution
containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10
mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 and collected into a well in the PDMS device without the
use of plastic tubing. The inset shows the microbubble size distribution
for ∼500 microbubbles. μ, σ, and C in the inset represent the average
(in μm), standard deviation (in μm), and coefficient of
variation, respectively.Microbubbles generated using the mixture of oleosin and (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 (molar ratio of oleosin:triblock
copolymer = 1:18) are remarkably stable once they are collected. When
microbubbles are collected and stored in water (microbubbles reside
at the air–water interface due to their buoyancy), microbubble
radius decreases by about 13% during the first few days and eventually
ceases to shrink further. These microbubbles remain stable at least
for 4 weeks, and their size does not show any changes after 5 days
as shown in Figure 7, suggesting that these
microbubbles will not undergo dissolution even after 4 weeks. The
stability of these microbubbles does not depend on whether N2 or C4F8 is used as the gas phase. In contrast,
microbubbles generated solely with (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 do not exhibit such excellent stability. These
results indicate that oleosin plays a critical role in stabilizing
the shell of microbubbles, which likely consists of a mixture of oleosin
and (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78, to prevent
complete dissolution or coalescence of microbubbles upon their collection.
Similar examples, in which shells suppresses the dissolution of microbubbles,
have been observed in microbubbles that have been stabilized with
other types of proteins, nanoparticles, or synthetic polymers.[20,41−61]
Figure 7
Micrographs
showing microbubbles stability over time for microbubbles
produced using a solution containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. (a) Size of microbubbles
over 7 days. (b) Microscope images of 24 days after collection.
Micrographs
showing microbubbles stability over time for microbubbles
produced using a solution containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. (a) Size of microbubbles
over 7 days. (b) Microscope images of 24 days after collection.As discussed briefly above, one
of the unique aspects of oleosin
is that the molecular structure and thus the properties of the monolayer
that contains this molecule can be engineered using recombinant protein
technology. Recombinant protein technology allows for precise molecular
engineering of proteins generated from microorganisms such as bacteria
and thus can be used to generate oleosin species with different functionality
and properties.[22] To demonstrate proof-of-principle
that this molecule has such modularity, we express a green fluorescent
protein mutant oleosin by fusing enhanced green fluorescent protein
(eGFP) to the N-terminus of the 42-30G-63 oleosin. The modified oleosin
genes are constructed using standard molecular biology techniques
and cloned into the expression vector pBamUK. eGFP-functonalized oleosin
is added to the aqueous phase during microbubble generation. It is
evident that the microbubbles produced with the blend of the two oleosin
species (pure at 1 mg mL–1, mutant at 0.05 mg mL–1) along with 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 have the eGFP mutant
species incorporated in the bubble shell, whereas the microbubbles
generated without the eGFP mutant species do not show surface fluorescence
(Figure 8). Also, fluorescence intensity is
observed to be fairly uniform on the surface of the bubbles. Our results
clearly indicate that that oleosin with different functionalities
can be generated and incorporated into the microbubble shell and that
oleosin distributes uniformly on the surface of microbubbles.
Figure 8
Confocal fluorescent
microscopy images of bubbles produced with
(a, b) oleosin and (c, d) with a blend containing the eGFP mutant.
In both cases a solution containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 is used to produce microbubbles.
Microbubbles are stored for 24 h before confocal microscopy is performed.
These images are taken by focusing at the equatorial planes of the
bubbles.[62]
Confocal fluorescent
microscopy images of bubbles produced with
(a, b) oleosin and (c, d) with a blend containing the eGFP mutant.
In both cases a solution containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 is used to produce microbubbles.
Microbubbles are stored for 24 h before confocal microscopy is performed.
These images are taken by focusing at the equatorial planes of the
bubbles.[62]Echogenicity measurements are carried out using microbubbles
generated
with a solution containing 1 mg mL–1 oleosin and
10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. We collect microbubbles directly in a ∼3
cm long dialysis tubing with a diameter of 16 mm, which is sealed
at one end and prefilled with PBS solution containing 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. Microubbles are transferred directly into the dialysis tube from
the PDMS device outlet using polyethylene tubing, which is submerged
in the PBS solution. After collecting a desired amount of microbubbles,
the tube is sealed on the other end to avoid introducing any air pockets
and is stored in 50 mL centrifuge tubes filled with PBS solution containing
10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. The tube is kept on a spinning wheel rotating
at 60 rpm to induce continuous motions of the microbubbles and more
importantly to remove large bubbles that may have been collected.
Since antivascular and other microbubble-based therapies are monitored
using high-frequency ultrasound,[10,63] the echogenicity
of the microbubbles is tested using a broadband high-frequency ultrasound
transducer at 7–15 MHz in brightness mode (B-mode). The microbubbles
are acoustically active along the entire length of the dialysis tube
as shown in Figure 9. In contrast, a PBS solution
containing 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78 without any microbubbles does not show
any acoustic signal, indicating that the oleosin-stabilized microbubbles
are highly echogenic. Microbubbles remain acoustically responsive
30 min after the initial measurement and even 1 week after the first
measurement, showing nondetectable changes in the signal brightness
(Figure 9). These results clearly indicate
that these microbubbles stabilized with oleosin are highly stable
and echogenic and thus could have significant potential for theranostic
applications.
Figure 9
Ultrasound sonography images of C4F8 microbubbles
generated with a solution containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. Ultrasound images of microbubbles
(a, b) 1–2 h after generation and (c, d) 30 min and (e, f)
7 days after initial imaging. Ultrasound images of control samples
are reported in panels g and h. The microbubbles have a radius of
about 4 μm.
Ultrasound sonography images of C4F8 microbubbles
generated with a solution containing 1 mg mL oleosin and 10 mg mL–1 (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78. Ultrasound images of microbubbles
(a, b) 1–2 h after generation and (c, d) 30 min and (e, f)
7 days after initial imaging. Ultrasound images of control samples
are reported in panels g and h. The microbubbles have a radius of
about 4 μm.
Conclusions
and Outlook
We have shown that a recombinant mutant oleosin,
in combination
with a triblock copolymer, (PEO)78-(PPO)30-(PEO)78, can be used to successfully produce stable and monodisperse
microbubbles with high echogenicity. We demonstrate that the use of
a PDMS microfluidic device with an air-actuated valve is an effective
method to control the size of microbubbles while maintaining narrow
size distribution. Microbubbles incorporating oleosin show high stability
and can be further functionalized using recombinant protein technology,
which we demonstrated by the incorporation of eGFP mutant oleosin
into microbubbles. We envisage that the combination of microfluidic
generation and oleosin-based stabilization of microbubbles will represent
a promising platform for ultrasound-related applications. In particular,
by functionalizing oleosin with specific targeting ligands via recombinant
protein techniques,[36,37] it will be possible to enable
localized microbubble-based ultrasound therapy. Also, by varying the
molecular structure of oleosin (e.g., controlling the structure of
hydrophobic domain), microbubble shells with different rheological
properties could be generated.
Authors: Lucille G Alexander; Richard B Sessions; Anthony R Clarke; Arthur S Tatham; Peter R Shewry; Johnathan A Napier Journal: Planta Date: 2002-02 Impact factor: 4.116
Authors: Julie A Straub; Donald E Chickering; Charles C Church; Bhavdeep Shah; Thomas Hanlon; Howard Bernstein Journal: J Control Release Date: 2005-08-29 Impact factor: 9.776
Authors: Andrew K W Wood; Sara Ansaloni; Lisa S Ziemer; William M-F Lee; Michael D Feldman; Chandra M Sehgal Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Andrew K W Wood; Ralph M Bunte; Jennie D Cohen; Jeff H Tsai; William M-F Lee; Chandra M Sehgal Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2007-08-27 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Zhuo Chen; Katherine W Pulsipher; Rajarshi Chattaraj; Daniel A Hammer; Chandra M Sehgal; Daeyeon Lee Journal: Langmuir Date: 2019-02-27 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: Polina G Rudakovskaya; Roman A Barmin; Pavel S Kuzmin; Elena P Fedotkina; Alexander N Sencha; Dmitry A Gorin Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2022-06-10 Impact factor: 6.525
Authors: Madhuvanthi A Kandadai; Prithviraj Mukherjee; Himanshu Shekhar; George J Shaw; Ian Papautsky; Christy K Holland Journal: Biomed Microdevices Date: 2016-06 Impact factor: 2.838