Biomedical Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
TABLE 3.8
Studies on Toxicity Due to Surface Chemistry and Charge
Type of Nanoparticle
Toxicity/Organ Affected
Mechanism Involved/Results
Reference
Carbon nanotubes
SWCNTs
Mesothelial cells
Well-dispersed SWCNTs are less
toxic than agglomerated SWCNTs.
Wick et al. (2007)
Carbon nanotubes,
SWCNTS and
MWCNTS
Genotoxicity/guinea-pig
alveolar and mouse
macrophages
Cause chromosomal breakage and
changes in chromosome number;
purified SWCNTs are more toxic
than MWCNTs.
Di-Giorgio et al. (2011)
Jia et al. (2005)
Carbon nanotubes
Dermal toxicity
In vitro
studies using a human
keratinocyte cell line showed that
carbon nanotube exposure resulted
in accelerated oxidative stress and
cellular toxicity, which may be
interpreted as potential for dermal
toxicity.
Shvedova et al. (2003)
Carbon nanotubes
SWCNTs
Cytotoxic/rat kidney cells
High toxicity to normal rat kidney
cells of two SWCNTs was due to
their carboxylic acid
functionalization.
Wang et al. (2011)
Protein absorption to
nanorods
Uptake of the nanomaterial
via receptor-mediated
endocytosis
Protein adsorption to the surface of
the nanorods flips their charge
immediately to similar negative
value of the serum proteins in the
original media.
Therefore, nanoparticles that had a
positive effective surface charge
upon preparation are no longer
cationic in the cellular media.
Protein adsorption to the
nanoparticle surface can mediate the
uptake of the nanomaterial via
receptor-mediated endocytosis.
Alkilany et al. (2009)
Conner and Schmid
(2003)
Gold nanoparticles
—
Goodman et al. found that cationic
gold nanospheres (2 nm in diameter)
are toxic (at certain doses).
Interestingly, the same nanoparticles
with a negatively charged surface
found to be not toxic at the same
concentration and in the same cell
line. This observation was explained
by the ability of the cationic
nanoparticles to interact with the
negatively charged cellular
membrane and the resultant
membrane disruption.
Goodman et al. (2004)
persistence, (3) greater epithelial effects (such as type II cell proliferation), and (4) the functional
impairment of alveolar macrophages (Oberdörster et al. 1994).
Reductions in size to the nano level cause an enormous increase in the surface-to-volume ratio.
Relatively more molecules of the chemical are present on the surface, enhancing the intrinsic toxic-
ity (Donaldson et al. 2004). This may be one of the reasons why nanoparticles are generally more
