Page 46 - 《应用声学》2021年第1期

42 2021 年 1 月

[11] Doinikov A A, Bouakaz A. Review of shell models for con- recovery dynamics in microbubble-mediated sonopora-
trast agent microbubbles[J]. Ieee Transactions on Ultra- tion[J]. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, 2013, 39(12):
sonics Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control, 2011, 58(5): 2393–2405.
981–993. [25] Rong N, Zhou H, Liu R, et al. Ultrasound and microbub-
[12] Forbes M M, O’Brien W D. Development of a theoretical ble mediated plasmid DNA uptake: a fast, global and
model describing sonoporation activity of cells exposed to multi-mechanisms involved process[J]. Journal of Con-
ultrasound in the presence of contrast agents[J]. The Jour- trolled Release, 2018, 273: 40–50.
nal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2012, 131(4): [26] Qin P, Han T, Yu A C H, et al. Mechanistic understand-
2723–2729. ing the bioeffects of ultrasound-driven microbubbles to
[13] Guo X S, Cai C L, Xu G Y, et al. Interaction between enhance macromolecule delivery[J]. Journal of Controlled
cavitation microbubble and cell: a simulation of sonopo- Release, 2018, 272: 169–181.
ration using boundary element method (BEM)[J]. Ultra- [27] Ward M, Wu J, Chiu J F. Experimental study of
sonics Sonochemistry, 2017, 39: 863–871. the effects of optison®concentration on sonoporation in
[14] Yang Y Y, Li Q Y, Guo X S, et al. Mechanisms underly- vitro[J]. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, 2000, 26(7):
ing sonoporation: interaction between microbubbles and 1169–1175.
cells[J]. Ultrasonics Sonochemistry, 2020, 67: 105096. [28] Gac S L, Zwaan E, van den Berg A, et al. Sonoporation
[15] Dollet B, Marmottant P, Garbin V. Bubble dynamics in of suspension cells with a single cavitation bubble in a
soft and biological matter[J]. Annual Review of Fluid Me- microfluidic confinement[J]. Lab on a Chip, 2007, 7(12):
chanics, 2019, 51(1): 331–355. 1666–1672.
[16] Kooiman K, Kokhuis T J A, van Rooij T, et al. DSPC or [29] Zhou Y, Yang K, Cui J, et al. Controlled permeation
DPPC as main shell component influences ligand distribu- of cell membrane by single bubble acoustic cavitation[J].
tion and binding area of lipid-coated targeted microbub- Journal of Controlled Release, 2012, 157(1): 103–111.
bles[J]. European Journal of Lipid Science and Technol- [30] Qin P, Xu L, Han T, et al. Effect of non-acoustic param-
ogy, 2014, 116(9): 1217–1227. eters on heterogeneous sonoporation mediated by single-
[17] Rong N, Zhang M R, Wang Y L, et al. Effects of ex- pulse ultrasound and microbubbles[J]. Ultrasonics Sono-
tracellular matrix rigidity on sonoporation facilitated by chemistry, 2016, 31: 107–115.
targeted microbubbles: bubble attachment, bubble dy- [31] Fan P, Zhang Y, Guo X, et al. Cell-cycle-specific cellular
namics, and cell membrane permeabilization[J]. Ultrason- responses to sonoporation[J]. Theranostics, 2017, 7(19):
ics Sonochemistry, 2020, 67: 105125. 4894–4908.
[18] Lajoinie G, Luan Y, Gelderblom E, et al. Non-spherical [32] de Cock I, Zagato E, Braeckmans K, et al. Ultrasound
oscillations drive the ultrasound-mediated release from and microbubble mediated drug delivery: acoustic pres-
targeted microbubbles[J]. Communications Physics, 2018, sure as determinant for uptake via membrane pores or
1(1): 235–248. endocytosis[J]. Journal of Controlled Release, 2015, 197:
[19] Baresch D, Garbin V. Acoustic trapping of microbub- 20–28.
bles in complex environments and controlled payload re- [33] Wang M, Zhang Y, Cai C, et al. Sonoporation-induced
lease[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- cell membrane permeabilization and cytoskeleton disas-
ences of the United States of America, 2020, 117(27): sembly at varied acoustic and microbubble-cell parame-
15490–15496. ters[J]. Scientific Reports, 2018, 8(1): 3885.
[20] Schlicher R K, Radhakrishna H, Tolentino T P, et al. [34] Zhou Y, Shi J, Cui J, et al. Effects of extracellular calcium
Mechanism of intracellular delivery by acoustic cavita- on cell membrane resealing in sonoporation[J]. Journal of
tion[J]. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology, 2006, 32(6): Controlled Release, 2008, 126(1): 34–43.
915–924. [35] Leow R S, Wan J M, Yu A C. Membrane blebbing as a re-
[21] Qiu Y, Luo Y, Zhang Y, et al. The correlation be- covery manoeuvre in site-specific sonoporation mediated
tween acoustic cavitation and sonoporation involved in by targeted microbubbles[J]. Journal of the Royal Society
ultrasound-mediated DNA transfection with polyethylen- Interface, 2015, 12(105): 20150029.
imine (PEI) in vitro[J]. Journal of Controlled Release, [36] Hutcheson J D, Schlicher R K, Hicks H K, et al. Saving
2010, 145(1): 40–48. cells from ultrasound-induced apoptosis: quantification of
[22] Zhou Y, Kumon R E, Cui J, et al. The size of sonoporation cell death and uptake following sonication and effects of
pores on the cell membrane[J]. Ultrasound in Medicine targeted calcium chelation[J]. Ultrasound in Medicine and
and Biology, 2009, 35(10): 1756–1760. Biology, 2010, 36(6): 1008–1021.
[23] Fan Z, Liu H, Mayer M, et al. Spatiotemporally con- [37] Nakamura M, Dominguez A N M, Decker J R, et al. Into
trolled single cell sonoporation[J]. Proceedings of the Na- the breach: how cells cope with wounds[J]. Open Biology,
tional Academy of Sciences of the United States of Amer- 2018, 8(10): 180135.
ica, 2012, 109(41): 16486–16491. [38] Fan Z, Kumon R E, Park J, et al. Intracellular delivery
[24] Hu Y, Wan J M, Yu A C. Membrane perforation and and calcium transients generated in sonoporation facili-