| Literature DB >> 35873037 |
Qingbo Lv1,2, Boxuan Ma1,2, Wujiao Li1,2, Guosheng Fu1,2, Xiaoyu Wang3, Yun Xiao1,2.
Abstract
The alarming mortality and morbidity rate of myocardial infarction (MI) is becoming an important impetus in the development of early diagnosis and appropriate therapeutic approaches, which are critical for saving patients' lives and improving post-infarction prognosis. Despite several advances that have been made in the treatment of MI, current strategies are still far from satisfactory. Nanomaterials devote considerable contribution to tackling the drawbacks of conventional therapy of MI by improving the homeostasis in the cardiac microenvironment via targeting, immune modulation, and repairment. This review emphasizes the strategies of nanomaterials-based MI treatment, including cardiac targeting drug delivery, immune-modulation strategy, antioxidants and antiapoptosis strategy, nanomaterials-mediated stem cell therapy, and cardiac tissue engineering. Furthermore, nanomaterials-based diagnosis strategies for MI was presented in term of nanomaterials-based immunoassay and nano-enhanced cardiac imaging. Taken together, although nanomaterials-based strategies for the therapeutics and diagnosis of MI are both promising and challenging, such a strategy still explores the immense potential in the development of the next generation of MI treatment.Entities:
Keywords: diagnosis; macrophage; myocardial infarction; nanomaterials; targeted delivery
Year: 2022 PMID: 35873037 PMCID: PMC9301085 DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2022.943009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Chem ISSN: 2296-2646 Impact factor: 5.545
FIGURE 1Schematic overview of the advances of nanomaterials and applications for both therapeutics and diagnosis.
Summary of the nanomaterials used for the therapy of MI.
| Category | Nanomaterials | Therapeutic agent | Administration route | Model | Results | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Liposomes | Liposomes | PARP-1 inhibitor | Intravenous administration | Myocardial I/R injury | 9-fold and 1.5-fold higher efficiencies of PARP-1 inhibition in cardiomyocytes and macrophages, respectively |
|
| Liposomes | Liposomes | AMO-1 | Intravenous administration | MI | Relieved ischemic arrhythmia by silencing of miR-1 and restored the depolarized resting membrane potential |
|
| Liposomes | Liposomes | Berberine | Intravenous administration | MI | Preserved the cardiac ejection fraction at day 28 after MI |
|
| Liposomes | SLNs | TFDM | Oral delivery | Myocardial I/R injury | Decrease infarct area, cardiac enzyme, and inflammatory factors |
|
| Liposomes | Liposomes | MI antigens and rapamycin | Intradermal injection | MI | Attenuated inflammation in the myocardium, inhibited adverse cardiac remodeling, and improved cardiac function |
|
| Polymers | PLGA | AdSCs and simvastatin | Intravenous administration | MI | Contributed to significant cardiac functional recovery with intrinsic myocardial tissue regeneration |
|
| Polymers | PLGA | TLR4 inhibitor TAK242 | Intravenous administration | Myocardial I/R injury | Reduced the infarct size by inhibiting recruitment of Ly-6Chigh monocytes to the heart, and decreased circulating HMGB1, and NF-κB activation and cytokine expressions |
|
| Polymers | PLGA | Irbesartan | Intravenous administration | Myocardial I/R injury | Inhibitd the recruitment of inflammatory monocytes to the IR heart, reduced the infarct size, and ameliorated left ventricular remodeling |
|
| Polymers | PEG-PLA | miR-133 | Intravenous administration | MI | Improvd the cardiac function, reduced the myocardial infarction area, and inhibited cardiomyocyte apoptosis, inflammation, and oxidative stress |
|
| Polymers | Chitosan and alginate | PGF | Intramyocardial injection | MI | Increased left-ventricular function, vascular density, and serum anti-inflammatory cytokine levels, and decreased scar area formation and serum pro-inflammatory cytokines levels |
|
| Polymers | PEG-DGL | miR-1 inhibitor | Intravenous administration | MI | Decreased apoptotic cell death in the infarct border zone and reduced myocardial infarct size |
|
| Polymers | PGEA | miR-499 and pVEGF | Intravenous administration | MI | Restored heart function and suppressed cardiac hypertrophy |
|
| Polymers | PLGA | IGF-1 | Intramyocardial injection | MI | Prevented cardiomyocyte apoptosis, reduced infarct size, and improved left ventricle ejection fraction |
|
| Polymers and Inorganic Nanomaterials | Fe3O4, silica-PEG | CD63 and MLC antibodies | Intravenous administration | MI | Reduced infarct size and improved left-ventricle ejection fraction and angiogenesis |
|
| Inorganic Nanomaterials | Iron | CD45 and MLC antibodies | Intravenous administration | Myocardial I/R injury | Reduced scar formation and improved pump function of the hearts |
|
| Inorganic Nanomaterials | Gold | DNAzyme functionalized gold nanoparticles | Intramyocardial injection | MI | Resulted in significant anti-inflammatory effects and improvement in acute cardiac function |
|
| Biomimetic Nanomaterials | Exosomes | hiPSCs and hiPSCs-derived exosomes | Intramyocardial injection | MI | Increased cardiac function, reduced scar size and cell apoptosis, and promoted angiogenesis |
|
| Biomimetic Nanomaterials | Monocyte mimics | MSC-derived EVs | Intravenous administration | Myocardial I/R injury | Promoted endothelial maturation during angiogenesis and modulated macrophage subpopulations |
|
| Biomimetic Nanomaterials | EVs | miR-21 | Intramyocardial injection | MI | Inhibited cell apoptosis and led to significant cardiac function improvement |
|
| Biomimetic Nanomaterials | IONPs | Exosome-mimetic extracellular NVs | Intramyocardial injection | MI | Induced an early shift from the inflammation phase to the reparative phase, reduced apoptosis and fibrosis, and enhanced angiogenesis and cardiac function recovery |
|
| Polymers and Biomimetic Nanomaterials | MIONs and PLA-PCB | PS | Intravenous administration | MI | Preserved the left ventricular remodeling and improved the cardiac function, and realized accurate diagnosis and site-specific treatment of the inflammatory stage |
|
PARP-1, poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1; I/R, ischemia–reperfusion; AMO-1, anti-miR-1, antisense oligonucleotides; MI, myocardial infarction; SLNs, solid lipid nanoparticles; TFDM, total flavonoid extract from dracocephalum moldavica L; PLGA, Poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid); AdSCs, adipose-derived stem cells; TLR4, toll-like receptor 4; HMGB1, high mobility group box 1; group box 1; PEG, polyethylene glycol; PLA, poly (lactide); PGF, placental growth factor; DGL, dendrigraft poly-L-lysine; PGEA, poly(glycidyl meth-acrylate); pVEGF, plasmid encoding vascular endothelial growth factor; IGF-1, insulin-like growth factor-1; MLC, myosin light chain; hiPSCs, human induced pluripotent stem cells; MSC, mesenchymal stem cell; EVs, extracellular vesicles; IONPs, Iron oxide nanoparticles; NVs, nanovesicles; MIONs, magnetic iron oxide nanocubes; PCB, polycarboxybetaine; PS, phosphatidylserine.
FIGURE 2Applying antibody-conjugated magnetic nanoparticles for the targeting delivery in the treatment of MI. Magnetic antibody-linked nanomatchmakers for therapeutic stem cell targeting in the treatment of MI. (A) Schematic representations of the cell matchmaking by magnetic bifunctional cell engager 1 (MagBICE) and the preparation of MagBICE nanoparticles. (B) Fluorescent microscopic images showing the binding of MagBICE1, but not unconjugated Feraheme (FH), to rat bone marrow mononuclear cells (BMCs). (C) Fluorescent microscopic images showing MagBICE1 conjoined BMCs (DiD-labelled, magenta) with injured cardiomyocytes, Adapted with permission from Cheng et al., 2014. (D) Schematic representations of vesicle shuttle which can effectively collect, transport, and release circulating exosomes to infarcted areas of the hearts by the core-shell-corona structure by applying antibody-conjugated magnetic nanoparticles. (E) Schematic of the GMNP fabrication. (F) Schematic of the construction of endothelial cell denoted surface-grafted magnetic nanoparticles (GMNPEC) by the addition of anti-CD63 and anti-myosin light chain (MLC) antibodies to GMNPs, and the attachment of rat-derived exosomes from the in vitro serum to the anti-CD63 on the surface of GMNPEC nanoparticles (GMNPEC–EXO). (G) Ex vivo fluorescent imaging of intravenously (i.v.) injected RhB-labelled GMNPN in MI-model rats with or without subsequent exposure to an external magnetic field. Adapted with permission from Liu et al., 2020.
FIGURE 3Nanomaterials use immune-modulation strategy to treat MI. (A) Chemical construction of PP/PS@MIONs nanotheranostic system by the thin-film dispersion method. (B) Schematic illustration for PP/PS@MIONs in MI. PP/PS@MIONs were accumulated in the MI area due to magnetic targeting and PS targeting and promoted the differentiation of the pro-inflammatory macrophages (M1) into the reparative macrophages (M2). (C) Representative MR images of hearts before and 24 h after i. v. administration of PP/PS@MIONs and PP@MIONs with or without a magnet. Adapted with permission from Chen et al., 2017. (D) Schematic illustration of MI treatment using liposomal nanoparticles loaded with MI-associated antigens and rapamycin (L-Ag/R). (E) The delivery of L-Ag/R promoted the antigen presentation efficiency of DCs, inhibited the expressions of co-stimulatory surface molecules and pro-inflammatory cytokines expression in DCs, and increased the expressions of anti-inflammatory cytokines in DCs. Adapted with permission from Kwon et al., 2021.
FIGURE 4The application of nanomaterials for the delivery of miRNA and pDNA to inhibit the cardiomyocytes apoptosis in MI. (A) Schematic illustration of the construction of unlockable heparin core-shell nanocomplexes (Hep@PGEA) and their applications in the delivery of miRNA and pDNA for the treatment of MI. (B) The time axis of this study and the evaluation of GSH amount in mouse hearts at different time points after MI. (C) Hep@PGEA preserved the cardiac function of mice after MI evaluated by M-mode echocardiograms. (D) The delivery of Hep@PGEA reduced the infarct areas and fibrosis areas reflected by quantification of Masson trichrome and Red Sirius staining. (E) Hep@PGEA inhibited the cardiomyocytes hypertrophy reflected by the WGA staining. Adapted with permission from Nie et al., 2018.
FIGURE 5The strategy of nanomaterials assistant stem cell therapy for MI. (A) Schematic illustration of the poly (lactic-co-glycolic acid) (PLGA) fabricated aligned nanofibers (ANFs) for the high-quality cardiac tissue-like constructs (CTLCs) differentiated from human induced pluripotent stem cells (hiPSCs). (B) The construction of PLGA-mediated ANFs and their effects on the 3D cardiac tissue-like constructs (CTLCs). (C) Schematic representation of CTLCs on the microelectrode array (MEA) and a representative electrogram of the field potential (FP). Activation maps showing the propagation of stimulated contractility on day 6. (D) CTLCs synchronize disconnected cardiomyocyte tissues and suppress re-entrant arrhythmia within scarred cardiomyocyte sheets. (E) Histological sections of CTLCs on the MI tissues cultured by aligned nanofibers and acellular nanofibers, respectively. Adapted with permission from Li et al., 2017.
FIGURE 6Mussel-inspired conductive cryogel as a promising strategy for the restoration of infarcted myocardium. (A) Schematic illustration of the mussel-inspired conductive cryogel for engineered cardiac tissue patch in rat MI models. (B) Characterization and ultrastructure of the DOPA-based Ppy PEG-gelatin cryogel. (C) The DOPA-based MA-G/PEGDA/Ppy cryogel showed higher protein expressions of α-actinin and CX-43 in the cardiomyocytes presented by immunofluorescent staining. (D) The DOPA-based MA-G/PEGDA/Ppy cryogel significantly improved the cardiac functions of the mice after MI. Adapted with permission from Wang et al., 2016.
Summary of nanomaterials-based immunoassay for MI diagnosis.
| Cardiac biomarker | Immunoassay | Nanomaterials | Detection limit | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mb | ECL | AuNPs | 34.6 ng/ml |
|
| ECL | QDs | 0.0492 ng/ml |
| |
| SPR | RGO | 4 pg/ml |
| |
| cTnI | ECL | QDs | 0.0005 ng/ml |
|
| ECL | QDs | 0.0184 ng/ml |
| |
| PEC | ZnO | 0.003 pg/ml |
| |
| CK-MB | ECL | AuNPs | 0.62 pg/ml |
|
| BNP | ECL | AuNPs | 0.11 pg/ml |
|
| GSH | PEC | CDs | 6.2 nmol/L |
|
Mb, myoglobin; cTnI, Troponin-I; CK-MB, creatine kinase-MB; BNP, B-type natriuretic peptide; GSH, glutathione; SPR, surface plasmon resonance; ECL, electrochemiluminescence; PEC, photoelectrochemistry; AuNPs, gold nanoparticles; QDs, quantum dots; RGO, reduced graphene oxide.
FIGURE 7Nano-biosensor based on electrochemical or photoelectrochemical for the detection of MI-related indicators. (A) Schematic illustration for the fabrication processes of the AuNPs/BNNSs nanosheets and the detection of myoglobin (Mb). (B) Electrochemical characterization of AuNPs/BNNSs nanosheets. (C) Detection of Mb and interference studies, stability, reproducibility, and real-sample analyses of AuNPs/BNNSs nanosheets. Adapted with permission from Adeel et al., 2019. (D) The mechanism of the carbon dots nano-biosensor based on photoelectrochemical for the detection of glutathione (GSH). (E) Sensitivity and photocurrents the carbon dots-based biosensors introducing silver nanoparticles, graphene oxide, and mesoporous silica. Adapted with permission from Li et al., 2018.
FIGURE 8MnO2/Gd2O3 nanocomposites used as a contrasting agent for MRI bioimaging modalities for sensitive detection of MI. (A) Schematic illustration of MnO2@BSA and Gd2O3@BSA nanocomposites for MR imaging of MI in rabbit models, the MnO2@BSA nanocomposites could be accumulated in MI regions and response to the low pH to liberate Mn2+ to achieve specific contrast enhancement for MR imaging of MI. (B) MR imaging of acute myocardium infarction in rabbits contrasted by Gd2O3@BSA nanocomposites. (C) MR imaging of acute myocardium infarction in rabbits contrasted by MnO2@BSA nanocomposites. Adapted with permission from Wang et al., 2020.