The effects of metallic nanoparticles as cytotoxicity or antibacterial activity are widely known. It is also obvious that ultrasound is one of the most widely used therapeutic modalities in medicine. The effect of application of therapeutical ultrasonic field in the presence of metallic nanoparticles AgCu <100？nm modified by phenanthroline or polyvinyl alcohol was examined on human ovarian carcinoma cells A2780. Metallic nanoparticles were characterized by electron microscopy and by measuring of zeta potential. The cell viability was tested by MTT test. The experimental results indicate a significant decrease of cell viability, which was affected by a combined action of ultrasound field and AgCu nanoparticles. The maximum decrease of cells viability was observed for nanoparticles modified by phenanthroline. The effect of metallic nanoparticles on human cell in presence of ultrasound exposure was found—a potential health risk or medical advantage of targeted therapy in the future. 1. Introduction Ultrasound is widely used in medicine and represents a large percentage of all imaging methods. Ultrasound is also used in therapy. For this reason it is necessary to study the effects of ultrasound on biological objects, although it is generally considered a modality with a very low risk of damage to the patient. The main mechanisms of biological action of ultrasonic energy on biological systems include cavitation, increase in temperature, and mechanical stress [1]. This paper shows that it is possible to observe changes due to ultrasound at the cellular level, for example, as changes in the porosity of cell membranes [2]. It is clear that the state of these structures in specific cases affects the uptake of active substances into the intracellular space. The possibility of targeted delivery of substances into cells using ultrasonic field has been established, both in drugs and in other macromolecular substances [3, 4]. Targeted synergetic effect of the ultrasound therapy and drugs is used in the sonodynamic therapy [5]. The still unsolved question is the effect of ultrasound on penetration of particles of nanometer scale into the intracellular space. This question is generally associated with particular risks of toxicity of nanoparticles, but it can be seen as a solution to some cancer treatment in the form of targeted therapy. Authors indicating the possibility of targeted nanoparticle delivery stimulated by ultrasound are not numerous and moreover they deal mainly with focused ultrasound of high intensity [6, 7]. The mechanism of ultrasound action in the
References
[1]
M. W. Miller, D. L. Miller, and A. A. Brayman, “A review of in vitro bioeffects of inertial ultrasonic cavitation from a mechanistic perspective,” Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, vol. 22, no. 9, pp. 1131–1154, 1996.
[2]
K. Tachibana, T. Uchida, K. Ogawa, N. Yamashita, and K. Tamura, “Induction of cell-membrane porosity by ultrasound,” The Lancet, vol. 353, no. 9162, p. 1409, 1999.
[3]
S. Mehier-Humbert, T. Bettinger, F. Yan, and R. H. Guy, “Plasma membrane poration induced by ultrasound exposure: implication for drug delivery,” Journal of Controlled Release, vol. 104, no. 1, pp. 213–222, 2005.
[4]
V. Frenkel, “Ultrasound mediated delivery of drugs and genes to solid tumors,” Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews, vol. 60, no. 10, pp. 1193–1208, 2008.
[5]
I. Rosenthal, J. Z. Sostaric, and P. Riesz, “Sonodynamic therapy—a review of the synergistic effects of drugs and ultrasound,” Ultrasonics Sonochemistry, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 349–363, 2004.
[6]
K. Park, “Focused ultrasound for targeted nanoparticle delivery to tumors,” Journal of Controlled Release, vol. 146, no. 3, p. 263, 2010.
[7]
K. C. Crowder, M. S. Hughes, J. N. Marsh et al., “Sonic activation of molecularly-targeted nanoparticles accelerates transmembrane lipid delivery to cancer cells through contact-mediated mechanisms: implications for enhanced local drug delivery,” Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology, vol. 31, no. 12, pp. 1693–1700, 2005.
[8]
A. Weir, P. Westerhoff, L. Fabricius, K. Hristovski, and N. von Goetz, “Titanium dioxide nanoparticles in food and personal care products,” Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 2242–2250, 2012.
[9]
A. Kumar, A. K. Pandey, S. S. Singh, R. Shanker, and A. Dhawan, “Cellular uptake and mutagenic potential of metal oxide nanoparticles in bacterial cells,” Chemosphere, vol. 83, no. 8, pp. 1124–1132, 2011.
[10]
V. Matranga and I. Corsi, “Toxic effects of engineered nanoparticles in the marine environment: model organisms and molecular approaches,” Marine Environmental Research, vol. 76, pp. 32–40, 2012.
[11]
S. Lanone, F. Rogerieux, J. Geys et al., “Comparative toxicity of 24 manufactured nanoparticles in human alveolar epithelial and macrophage cell lines,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 6, article 14, 2009.
[12]
R. P. Singh and P. Ramarao, “Cellular uptake, intracellular trafficking and cytotoxicity of silver nanoparticles,” Toxicology Letters, vol. 213, no. 2, pp. 249–259, 2012.
[13]
B. Sha, W. Gao, S. Wang, F. Xu, and T. Lu, “Cytotoxicity of titanium dioxide nanoparticles differs in four liver cells from human and rat,” Composites Part B: Engineering, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 2136–2144, 2011.
[14]
J. Sopou？ek, J. Pinkas, P. Bro？ et al., “Ag-Cu colloid synthesis: bimetallic nanoparticle characterisation and thermal treatment,” Journal of Nanomaterials, vol. 2014, Article ID 638964, 13 pages, 2014.
[15]
M. Taner, N. Sayar, I. G. Yulug, and S. Suzer, “Synthesis, characterization and antibacterial investigation of silver-copper nanoalloys,” Journal of Materials Chemistry, vol. 21, no. 35, pp. 13150–13154, 2011.
[16]
R. Prucek, J. Tu？ek, M. Kilianová et al., “The targeted antibacterial and antifungal properties of magnetic nanocomposite of iron oxide and silver nanoparticles,” Biomaterials, vol. 32, no. 21, pp. 4704–4713, 2011.
[17]
T. Mosmann, “Rapid colorimetric assay for cellular growth and survival: application to proliferation and cytotoxicity assays,” Journal of Immunological Methods, vol. 65, no. 1-2, pp. 55–63, 1983.
[18]
J.-P. Piret, S. Vankoningsloo, J. Mejia et al., “Differential toxicity of copper (II) oxide nanoparticles of similar hydrodynamic diameter on human differentiated intestinal Caco-2 cell monolayers is correlated in part to copper release and shape,” Nanotoxicology, vol. 6, no. 7, pp. 789–803, 2012.
[19]
S. Lanone, F. Rogerieux, J. Geys et al., “Comparative toxicity of 24 manufactured nanoparticles in human alveolar epithelial and macrophage cell lines,” Particle and Fibre Toxicology, vol. 6, article 14, 2009.
[20]
J. Wu, J. Pepe, and M. Rincón, “Sonoporation, anti-cancer drug and antibody delivery using ultrasound,” Ultrasonics, vol. 44, supplement, pp. e21–e25, 2006.
[21]
H. A. Hancock, L. H. Smith, J. Cuesta et al., “Investigations into pulsed high-intensity focused ultrasound-enhanced delivery: preliminary evidence for a novel mechanism,” Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, vol. 35, no. 10, pp. 1722–1736, 2009.
[22]
M. Postema, S. Kotopoulis, A. Delalande, and O. H. Gilja, “Sonoporation: why microbubbles create pores,” Ultraschall in der Medizin, vol. 33, pp. 97–98, 2012.
