Literature DB >> 28254565

In vitro ultrasound experiments: Standing wave and multiple reflections influence on the outcome.

Wojciech Secomski1, Krzysztof Bilmin2, Tamara Kujawska3, Andrzej Nowicki3, Paweł Grieb2, Peter A Lewin4.   

Abstract

The purpose of this work was to determine the influence of standing waves and possible multiple reflections under the conditions often encountered in examining the effects of ultrasound exposure on the cell cultures in vitro. More specifically, the goal was to quantitatively ascertain the influence of ultrasound exposure under free field (FF) and standing waves (SW) and multiple reflections (MR) conditions (SWMR) on the biological endpoint (50% cell necrosis). Such information would help in designing the experiments, in which the geometry of the container with biological tissue may prevent FF conditions to be established and in which the ultrasound generated temperature elevation is undesirable. This goal was accomplished by performing systematic, side-by-side experiments in vitro with C6 rat glioma cancer cells using 12 well and 96 well plates. It was determined that to obtain 50% of cell viability using the 12 well plates, the spatial average, temporal average (ISATA) intensities of 0.32W/cm2 and 5.89W/cm2 were needed under SWMR and FF conditions, respectively. For 96 well plates the results were 0.80W/cm2 and 2.86W/cm2 respectively. The corresponding, hydrophone measured pRMS maximum pressure amplitude values, were 0.71MPa, 0.75MPa, 0.75MPa and 0.73MPa, respectively. These results suggest that pRMS pressure amplitude was independent of the measurement set-up geometry and hence could be used to predict the cells' mortality threshold under any in vitro experimental conditions or even as a starting point for (pre-clinical) in vivo tests. The described procedure of the hydrophone measurements of the pRMS maximum pressure amplitude at the λ/2 distance (here 0.75mm) from the cell's level at the bottom of the dish or plate provides the guideline allowing the difference between the FF and SWMR conditions to be determined in any experimental setup. The outcome of the measurements also indicates that SWMR exposure might be useful at any ultrasound assisted therapy experiments as it permits to reduce thermal effects. Although the results presented are valid for the experimental conditions used in this study they can be generalized. The analysis developed provides methodology facilitating independent laboratories to determine their specific ultrasound exposure parameters for a given biological end-point under standing waves and multiple reflections conditions. The analysis also permits verification of the outcome of the experiments mimicking pre- and clinical environment between different, unaffiliated teams of researchers.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anticancer therapy; C6 glioma; Sonodynamic therapy; Standing wave; Ultrasound bio-effects; Ultrasound intensity; Ultrasound pressure

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28254565      PMCID: PMC5503701          DOI: 10.1016/j.ultras.2017.02.008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasonics        ISSN: 0041-624X            Impact factor:   2.890


  27 in total

1.  Study of factors affecting the magnitude and nature of ultrasound exposure with in vitro set-ups.

Authors:  Jarkko J Leskinen; Kullervo Hynynen
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2012-03-16       Impact factor: 2.998

2.  Evaluation and comparison of three novel microbubbles: enhancement of ultrasound-induced cell death and free radicals production.

Authors:  Mariame A Hassan; Loreto B Feril; Kosho Suzuki; Nobuki Kudo; Katsuro Tachibana; Takashi Kondo
Journal:  Ultrason Sonochem       Date:  2008-10-17       Impact factor: 7.491

3.  Chemotherapy in experimental brain tumor, part 1: in vitro colorimetric MTT assay.

Authors:  C M Hand; J R Vender; P Black
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 4.130

4.  Sonodynamic effect of erythrosin B on sarcoma 180 cells in vitro.

Authors:  Nagahiko Yumita; Ken-ichi Kawabata; Kazuaki Sasaki; Shin-ichiro Umemura
Journal:  Ultrason Sonochem       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 7.491

5.  Sonodynamic therapy using water-dispersed TiO2-polyethylene glycol compound on glioma cells: comparison of cytotoxic mechanism with photodynamic therapy.

Authors:  Shigeru Yamaguchi; Hiroyuki Kobayashi; Takuhito Narita; Koki Kanehira; Shuji Sonezaki; Nobuki Kudo; Yoshinobu Kubota; Shunsuke Terasaka; Kiyohiro Houkin
Journal:  Ultrason Sonochem       Date:  2010-12-31       Impact factor: 7.491

6.  In vitro study of haematoporphyrin monomethyl ether-mediated sonodynamic effects on C6 glioma cells.

Authors:  Jian-hua Li; Da-yong Song; Yong-gang Xu; Zheng Huang; Wu Yue
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2008-09-20       Impact factor: 3.307

7.  Enhancement of ultrasonically induced cell damage by phthalocyanines in vitro.

Authors:  Katarzyna Milowska; Teresa Gabryelak
Journal:  Ultrasonics       Date:  2008-04-12       Impact factor: 2.890

8.  In vitro sonodynamic cytotoxicity in regulated cavitation conditions.

Authors:  Jhony El Maalouf; Jean-Christophe Béra; Laurent Alberti; Dominique Cathignol; Jean-Louis Mestas
Journal:  Ultrasonics       Date:  2008-09-13       Impact factor: 2.890

9.  Sonodynamic therapy consisting of focused ultrasound and a photosensitizer causes a selective antitumor effect in a rat intracranial glioma model.

Authors:  Masani Nonaka; Masaaki Yamamoto; Shinichiro Yoshino; Shin-Ichiro Umemura; Kazunari Sasaki; Takeo Fukushima
Journal:  Anticancer Res       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.480

10.  Effects of 5-aminolevulinic acid-mediated sonodynamic therapy on macrophages.

Authors:  Jiali Cheng; Xin Sun; Shuyuan Guo; Wei Cao; Haibo Chen; Yinghua Jin; Bo Li; Qiannan Li; Huan Wang; Zhu Wang; Qi Zhou; Peng Wang; Zhiguo Zhang; Wenwu Cao; Ye Tian
Journal:  Int J Nanomedicine       Date:  2013-02-13
View more
  4 in total

1.  Parametric Study of Acoustic Droplet Vaporization Thresholds and Payload Release From Acoustically-Responsive Scaffolds.

Authors:  Xiaofang Lu; Xiaoxiao Dong; Sam Natla; Oliver D Kripfgans; J Brian Fowlkes; Xueding Wang; Renny Franceschi; Andrew J Putnam; Mario L Fabiilli
Journal:  Ultrasound Med Biol       Date:  2019-06-22       Impact factor: 2.998

Review 2.  Design and Challenges of Sonodynamic Therapy System for Cancer Theranostics: From Equipment to Sensitizers.

Authors:  Zhuoran Gong; Zhifei Dai
Journal:  Adv Sci (Weinh)       Date:  2021-03-12       Impact factor: 16.806

3.  Focused ultrasound neuromodulation on a multiwell MEA.

Authors:  Marta Saccher; Shinnosuke Kawasaki; Martina Proietti Onori; Geeske M van Woerden; Vasiliki Giagka; Ronald Dekker
Journal:  Bioelectron Med       Date:  2022-01-27

4.  An ultrasound-driven immune-boosting molecular machine for systemic tumor suppression.

Authors:  Liu Wang; Guangzhe Li; Lei Cao; Yi Dong; Yang Wang; Shisheng Wang; Yueqing Li; Xiuhan Guo; Yi Zhang; Fangfang Sun; Xuemei Du; Jiangan Su; Qing Li; Xiaojun Peng; Kun Shao; Weijie Zhao
Journal:  Sci Adv       Date:  2021-10-20       Impact factor: 14.136

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.