| Literature DB >> 31186701 |
Tanja Khosrawipour1,2, Justyna Schubert3, Veria Khosrawipour4, Haris Chaudhry1, Jakub Grzesiak5, Mohamed Arafkas6, Agata Mikolajczyk7.
Abstract
Pressurized intra-peritoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) has been introduced to the clinical setting as a novel approach for the treatment of peritoneal metastasis. The local interaction of chemoaerosol droplets with the peritoneal surface as well as their distribution pattern is considered the main advantage over conventional liquid intraperitoneal chemotherapy. The aim of the present study was to investigate the behavior of these aerosol particles during PIPAC application via electron microscopy. Solutions of doxycycline, liposomal doxorubicin and macrophage cells were aerosolized using an established ex-vivo model. PIPAC was performed on peritoneum samples via microcatheter (MC) at a pressure of 12 mmHg C02 at 27°C. Following PIPAC the surface structure of applied particles was measured via electron microscopy. The aerosol particle contact of doxycyclin created a nanofilm of ~200 nm height on the peritoneal surface, and this height was revealed to be independent of the size of the initial particle hitting. These nanofilm blocks of 'cylinders' are of different diameters depending on the initial aerosol particle hitting that spot. Diameters of these 'cylinders' are far wider than the original diameter of the initial aerosol particle. However, coated particles such as liposomal doxorubicin and macrophages remained intact following contact with the peritoneal surface. Based on this and other data, the concept that aerosol particles exhibit a gas-like behavior in the abdomen creating a therapeutic capnoperitoneum should be revised. Fluid aerosol particles collide with the peritoneum creating a nanofilm. The interaction of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol on the peritoneum is therefore closer to the distribution of a liquid film than to that of a gas. Further studies are required to further analyze the interaction of this nanofilm on the peritoneum.Entities:
Keywords: Pressurized Intra-Peritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy; electron microscopy; ex-vivo; nanoparticles; peritoneal metastasis
Year: 2019 PMID: 31186701 PMCID: PMC6507490 DOI: 10.3892/ol.2019.10162
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Lett ISSN: 1792-1074 Impact factor: 2.967
Figure 1.Laparoscopy-assisted ex-vivo experiment on fresh swine peritoneum investigating the submicroscopic particle behavior of aerosolized material in PIPAC via MC device. For better demonstration, the front wall of the plastic box (ex-vivo PIPAC model) has been removed. MC is placed in the center of the top in a 5 mm trocar. 1) insufflation tube, 2) trocar 3) microcatheter, 4) tissue samples at the rear of the box. MC, microcatheter.
Figure 2.Electron microscopy at different ML of doxycyclin aerosol particles after collision onto the peritoneal surface covered by a thin layer of Escherichia coli, (A) ×100 ML and (B) ×1,000 ML. (C) Structurally Intact Liposomal doxorubicin particles ×14.000 ML and (D) macrophages ×10.000 ML) on the peritoneal surface (lower pictures). ML, magnification levels.
Figure 3.Left picture: Electron microscopy and magnifications of one doxycyclin aerosol particle following collision onto the peritoneal surface. The surface was previously covered with a thin layer of Escherichia coli (left picture at ×1000 ML). (A) magnification of a raft in the central area of the doxocyclin layer (×20.000 ML). (B) Magnification of the outer border of the doxycyclin layer (×20.000 ML). ML, magnification levels.
Figure 4.(A) Amount, distribution and diameter of cylindrical particles on peritoneal surface in an area of 4 mm2 are presented. (B) The mean particle amount for every measurement was calculated as well as a mean particle diameter for the cylindrical particles for that probe. (C) Calculated diameter of the initial spherical aerosol particles of the same sample before hitting the peritoneal surface. Diameters were grouped in <13 µm, 13–17.9 µm and >18 µm and distribution of these groups were presented in percent to the total particle amount on the 4 mm2 sample.
Figure 5.Proposed model of aerosol particle impaction and tissue penetration effect vs. lavage with the same total drug dose.