Display options
Cite
Dietz-Laursonn K, Beckmann R, Ginter S, et al. In-vitro cell treatment with focused shockwaves-influence of the experimental setup on the sound field and biological reaction. J Ther Ultrasound. 2016;4:10doi: 10.1186/s40349-016-0053-z.
Dietz-Laursonn, K., Beckmann, R., Ginter, S., Radermacher, K., & de la Fuente, M. (2016). In-vitro cell treatment with focused shockwaves-influence of the experimental setup on the sound field and biological reaction. Journal of therapeutic ultrasound, 410. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40349-016-0053-z
Dietz-Laursonn, Kristin, et al. "In-vitro cell treatment with focused shockwaves-influence of the experimental setup on the sound field and biological reaction." Journal of therapeutic ultrasound vol. 4 (2016): 10. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40349-016-0053-z
Dietz-Laursonn K, Beckmann R, Ginter S, Radermacher K, de la Fuente M. In-vitro cell treatment with focused shockwaves-influence of the experimental setup on the sound field and biological reaction. J Ther Ultrasound. 2016 Mar 29;4:10. doi: 10.1186/s40349-016-0053-z. eCollection 2016. PMID: 27030807; PMCID: PMC4812651.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

J Ther Ultrasound. 2016 Mar 29;4:10. doi: 10.1186/s40349-016-0053-z. eCollection 2016.

In-vitro cell treatment with focused shockwaves-influence of the experimental setup on the sound field and biological reaction.

Journal of therapeutic ultrasound

Kristin Dietz-Laursonn, Rainer Beckmann, Siegfried Ginter, Klaus Radermacher, Matías de la Fuente

Affiliations

  1. Chair of medical engineering, RWTH Aachen University, Pauwelsstraße 20, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
  2. Department of Anatomy and Cell Biology, RWTH Aachen University, Wendlingweg 2, Aachen, 52074 Germany.
  3. Richard Wolf GmbH, Pforzheimer Straße 32, Knittlingen, 75438 Germany.

PMID: 27030807 PMCID: PMC4812651 DOI: 10.1186/s40349-016-0053-z

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To improve understanding of shockwave therapy mechanisms, in vitro experiments are conducted and the correlation between cell reaction and shockwave parameters like the maximum pressure or energy density is studied. If the shockwave is not measured in the experimental setup used, it is usually assumed that the device's shockwave parameters (=manufacturer's free field measurements) are valid. But this applies only for in vitro setups which do not modify the shockwave, e.g., by reflection or refraction. We hypothesize that most setups used for in vitro shockwave experiments described in the literature influence the sound field significantly so that correlations between the physical parameters and the biological reaction are not valid.

METHODS: To reveal the components of common shockwave in vitro setups which mainly influence the sound field, 32 publications with 37 setups used for focused shockwave experiments were reviewed and evaluated regarding cavitation, cell container material, focal sound field size relative to cell model size, and distance between treated cells and air. For further evaluation of the severity of those influences, experiments and calculations were conducted.

RESULTS: In 37 setups, 17 different combinations of coupling, cell container, and cell model are described. The setup used mainly is a transducer coupled via water to a tube filled with a cell suspension. As changes of the shockwaves' maximum pressure of 11 % can already induce changes of the biological reaction, the sound field and biological reactions are mainly disturbed by use of standard cell containers, use of coupling gel, air within the 5 MPa focal zone, and cell model sizes which are bigger than half the -6 dB focal dimensions.

CONCLUSIONS: Until now, correct and sufficient information about the shockwave influencing cells in vitro is only provided in 1 of 32 publications. Based on these findings, guidelines for improved in vitro setups are proposed which help minimize the influence of the setup on the sound field.

Keywords: ESWT; Experimental setup; In vitro; Review; Shockwave; Shockwave parameters; Therapy

References

  1. Cancer Res. 1999 Oct 15;59(20):5227-32 - PubMed
  2. J Urol. 2006 Dec;176(6 Pt 1):2706-10 - PubMed
  3. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1990;16(6):587-94 - PubMed
  4. Urol Res. 1988;16(6):419-26 - PubMed
  5. J Urol. 2002 Oct;168(4 Pt 1):1556-62 - PubMed
  6. J Foot Ankle Res. 2015 Feb 05;8:3 - PubMed
  7. Phys Med Biol. 2001 Feb;46(2):413-37 - PubMed
  8. Stem Cell Res. 2013 Sep;11(2):951-64 - PubMed
  9. Urology. 1991 Dec;38(6):571-6 - PubMed
  10. Urol Res. 2010 Aug;38(4):321-6 - PubMed
  11. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2005 Jan;31(1):115-9 - PubMed
  12. Biomed Tech (Berl). 2002;47 Suppl 1 Pt 1:382-5 - PubMed
  13. J Vis Exp. 2014 Apr 08;(86):null - PubMed
  14. Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 2001 Sep 28;287(3):648-55 - PubMed
  15. Coron Artery Dis. 2006 Feb;17(1):63-70 - PubMed
  16. Cancer Sci. 2006 Apr;97(4):296-304 - PubMed
  17. Phys Med Biol. 2001 Apr;46(4):1245-64 - PubMed
  18. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002 Mar;84-A(3):335-41 - PubMed
  19. Vasc Med. 2011 Oct;16(5):365-77 - PubMed
  20. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2003 Sep;123(7):345-8 - PubMed
  21. J Surg Res. 1994 Dec;57(6):677-81 - PubMed
  22. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2001 May;27(5):665-71 - PubMed
  23. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1996;22(9):1131-54 - PubMed
  24. J Trauma. 2008 Dec;65(6):1402-10 - PubMed
  25. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1989;15(3):213-27 - PubMed
  26. Urol Res. 1990;18(4):255-8 - PubMed
  27. J Urol. 1991 Jan;145(1):171-5 - PubMed
  28. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2003 Sep;81(1):11-9 - PubMed
  29. Acta Biochim Biophys Sin (Shanghai). 2004 Nov;36(11):741-8 - PubMed
  30. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2001 Jun;(387):95-101 - PubMed
  31. Ultrasonics. 2014 Jan;54(1):131-6 - PubMed
  32. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008 May;34(5):841-52 - PubMed
  33. J Acoust Soc Am. 2008 Oct;124(4):2406-20 - PubMed
  34. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1999 Mar;25(3):473-9 - PubMed
  35. J Surg Res. 2014 Jan;186(1):484-92 - PubMed
  36. Int Orthop. 1991;15(3):181-4 - PubMed
  37. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2004 Jul-Aug;142(4):462-6 - PubMed
  38. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1997;23 (6):939-52 - PubMed
  39. Biomed Tech (Berl). 1998 Oct;43(10):269-74 - PubMed
  40. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1989;15(5):451-60 - PubMed
  41. J Acoust Soc Am. 2011 Oct;130(4):1888-98 - PubMed
  42. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2007 Sep;33(9):1495-503 - PubMed
  43. IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control. 1998;45(3):788-99 - PubMed
  44. Artif Cells Blood Substit Immobil Biotechnol. 2003 Nov;31(4):449-66 - PubMed
  45. Oncol Rep. 2006 Jan;15(1):267-73 - PubMed
  46. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2011 May;92(2):187-93 - PubMed
  47. Burns. 2010 Sep;36(6):844-9 - PubMed
  48. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1998 Sep;24(7):1055-9 - PubMed
  49. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009 May;129(5):641-7 - PubMed
  50. J Acoust Soc Am. 1998 Nov;104(5):3126-9 - PubMed
  51. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2011 Dec;37(12):2105-15 - PubMed
  52. Urol Res. 1989;17(1):13-9 - PubMed
  53. Ostomy Wound Manage. 2014 Jul;60(7):26-39 - PubMed
  54. Br J Rheumatol. 1994 Oct;33(10):901-8 - PubMed
  55. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol. 1989 Aug;25(8):1173-9 - PubMed
  56. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003 Mar;62(3):248-50 - PubMed
  57. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2000 Jan-Feb;138(1):29-33 - PubMed
  58. Acta Orthop. 2009 Oct;80(5):612-7 - PubMed
  59. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2008 Feb;34(2):334-42 - PubMed
  60. Ultrasound Med Biol. 1992;18(8):691-9 - PubMed
  61. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2011 Mar;131(3):303-9 - PubMed
  62. Circulation. 2000 Jul 11;102(2):238-45 - PubMed
  63. J Urol. 1989 Apr;141(4):965-8 - PubMed

Publication Types