Biomedical electric devices provide great assistance for health and life quality. However, their maintainable need remains a serious issue for the restricted duration of energy storage. Therefore, scientists are investigating alternative technologies such as nanogenerators that could harvest the mechanical energy of the human heart to act as the main source of energy for the pacemaker. Cardiac contraction is not a source for circulation; it utilizes body energy as an alternative energy source to recharge pacemaker devices. This is a key biomedical innovation to protect patients’ lives from possible risks resulting from repeated surgery. A batteryless pacemaker is possible via an implantable energy collecting tool, exchanging the restriction of the current batteries for a sustainable self-energy resource technique. In this context, the physiology of heart energy in the preservation of blood distribution pulse generation and the effects of cardiac hormones on the heart’s pacemaker shall be outlined. In this review, we summarized different technologies for the implantable energy harvesters and self-powered implantable medical devices with emphasis on nanogenerator-based sensors for energy harvesting from cardiac contraction. It could conclude that recent hybrid bio-nanogenerator systems of both piezoelectric and triboelectric devices based on biocompatible biomaterials and clean energy are promising biomedical devices for harvesting energy from cardiac and body movement. These implantable and wearable nanogenerators become self-powered biomedical tools with high efficacy, durability, thinness, flexibility, and low cost. Although many studies have proven their safety, there is a need for their long-term biosafety and biocompatibility. A further note on the biocompatibility of bio-generator sensors shall be addressed.
In the present work, different nanoparticles spinel ferrite series (MFe2O4, Co0.5M0.5Fe2O4; M = Co, Mn, Ni, Mg, Cu, or Zn) have been obtained via sonochemical approach. Then, sol–gel method was employed to design core–shell magnetoelectric nanocomposites by coating these nanoparticles with BaTiO3 (BTO). The structure and morphology of the prepared samples were examined by X-ray powder diffraction (XRD), scanning electron microscope (SEM) coupled with energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX), high-resolution transmission electron microscope (HR-TEM), and zeta potential. XRD analysis showed the presence of spinel ferrite and BTO phases without any trace of a secondary phase. Both phases crystallized in the cubic structure. SEM micrographs illustrated an agglomeration of spherical grains with nonuniformly diphase orientation and different degrees of agglomeration. Moreover, HR-TEM revealed interplanar d-spacing planes that are in good agreement with those of the spinel ferrite phase and BTO phase. These techniques along with EDX analyses confirmed the successful formation of the desired nanocomposites. Zeta potential was also investigated. The biological influence of (MFe2O4, CoMFe) MNPs and core–shell (MFe2O4@BTO, CoMFe@BTO) magnetoelectric nanocomposites were examined by MTT and DAPI assays. Post 48 h of treatments, the anticancer activity of MNPs and MENCs was investigated on human colorectal carcinoma cells (HCT-116) against the cytocompatibility of normal non-cancerous cells (HEK-293). It was established that MNPs possess anti-colon cancer capability while MENCs exhibited a recovery effect due to the presence of a protective biocompatible BTO layer. RBCs hemolytic effect of NPs has ranged from non- to low-hemolytic effect. This effect that could be attributed to the surface charge from zeta potential, also the CoMnFe possesses the stable and lowest zeta potential in comparison with CoFe2O4 and MnFe2O4 also to the protective effect of shell. These findings open up wide prospects for biomedical applications of MNPs as anticancer and MENCs as promising drug nanocarriers.
Background Platinum-based drugs are widely used in cancer therapy, but are known for toxic side effects and resistance. Combinational drug delivery represents an effective chemotherapeutic strategy, but often leads to an increased toxicity. Aim of this study is to test the co-delivery of cisplatin with natural antioxidants on hierarchial porous large surface area hexagonal nanocarriers for synergistic action. Results A series of structured mesoporous materials were impregnated with magnetic spinel ferrite (30% CuFe2O4) and then coated with curcumin (25% wt/wt). Mesosilicalite and MCM-41 with high curcumin release abilities were functionalized with cisplatin (5% wt/wt) for synergistic effect of combinational drugs. The cytotoxic efficiency of our nanocomposites was tested on cell viability of MCF7 (human breast cancer), human cervical cancer (HeLa), colorectal cancer (HCT116), and HFF (human foreskin fibroblasts) cell lines using the MTT cell viability assay. At a concentration of 0.1 mg/ml, CuFe2O4/mesosilicalite/curcumin/cisplatin resulted in 89.53% reduction in viability in MCF7, 94.03% in HeLa, 64% in HCT116 and 87% in HFF; whereas, CuFe2O4/MCM-41/curcumin/cisplatin resulted in 76% reduction in viability in MCF7, 64.46% in HeLa, 64% in HCT116 and 24% in HFF. The EC50 for CuFe2O4/mesosilicalite/curcumin/cisplatin was 81.23 µg/ml in MCF7, 47.55 µg/ml in HeLa, 48.96 µg/ml in HCT116 and 76.83 µg/ml in HFF. The EC50 for CuFe2O4/MCM-41/curcumin/cisplatin was 72.51 µg/ml in MCF7, 58.6 µg/ml in HeLa, 62.58 µg/ml in HCT116 and 154.2 µg/ml in HFF. Furthermore, cells treated with both nanocomposites had a high number of cleaved Caspase 3-positive cells suggesting that the reduction in cell viability was triggered by activating the apoptotic signaling pathway. Conclusion Our results show that CuFe2O4/MCM-41/curcumin/cisplatin is a better candidate for combinational drug therapy due to its lowest EC50 value and the wider difference in EC50 (a fold change) between cancerous and non-cancerous cell line.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.