4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Endothelial biocompatibility and accumulation of SPION under flow conditions

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETISM AND MAGNETIC MATERIALS
Volume 380, Issue -, Pages 20-26

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmmm.2014.09.005

Keywords

Atherosclerosis; Magnetic nanoparticle; Endothelial cell; SPION uptake; Biocompatibility; Live-cell analysis

Funding

  1. DFG [CI 162/2-1, AL 552/5-1, SPP1681]
  2. [FP7-NMP-2012-LARGE-6-309820]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Magnetic targeting is considered a promising method to accumulate the nanoparticles at the sites of atherosclerotic lesions, but little is known about the biological effects of magnetic nanoparticles on the vascular wall. Here, we investigated endothelial cell growth and vitality upon treatment with SPION (0-60 mu g/mL) using two complementing methods: real-time cell analysis and live cell microscopy. Moreover, the uptake of circulating superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) was assessed in an in vitro model of arterial bifurcations. At the tested concentrations, SPIONs were well tolerated and had no major influence on endothelial cell growth. Our results further showed a uniform distribution of endothelial SPION uptake independent of channel geometry or hemodynamic conditions: In the absence of magnetic force, no increase in accumulation of SPIONs at non uniform shear stress region at the outer walls of bifurcation was observed. Application of external magnet allowed enhanced accumulation of SPIONs at the regions of non uniform shear stress. Increased uptake of SPIONs at non uniform shear stress region was well tolerated by endothelial cells (ECs) and did not affect endothelial cell viability or attachment. These findings indicate that magnetic targeting can constitute a promising and safe technique for the delivery of imaging and therapeutic nanoparticles to atherosclerotic lesions. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available