Comparison of SERS pH probe responses after microencapsulation within hydrogel matrices
Significance: Personalized medicine requires the tracking of an individual’s metabolite levels over time to detect anomalies and evaluate the body’s response to medications. Implanted sensors offer effective means to continuously monitor specific metabolite levels, provided they are accurate, stable...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of biomedical optics 2021-09, Vol.26 (9), p.097001-097001 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 097001 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 097001 |
container_title | Journal of biomedical optics |
container_volume | 26 |
creator | Kotturi, Dayle Paterson, Sureyya McShane, Mike |
description | Significance: Personalized medicine requires the tracking of an individual’s metabolite levels over time to detect anomalies and evaluate the body’s response to medications. Implanted sensors offer effective means to continuously monitor specific metabolite levels, provided they are accurate, stable over long time periods, and do no harm.
Aim: Four types of hydrogel embedded with pH-sensitive sensors were evaluated for their accuracy, sensitivity, reversibility, longevity, dynamic response, and consistency in static versus dynamic conditions and long-term storage.
Approach: Raman spectroscopy was first used to calibrate the intensity of pH-sensitive peaks of the Raman-active hydrogel sensors in a static pH environment. The dynamic response was then assessed for hydrogels exposed to changing pH conditions within a flow cell. Finally, the static pH response after 5 months of storage was determined.
Results: All four types of hydrogels allowed the surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) sensors to respond to the pH level of the local environment without introducing interfering signals, resulting in consistent calibration curves. When the pH level changed, the probes in the gels were slow to reach steady-state, requiring several hours, and response times were found to vary among hydrogels. Only one type, poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (pHEMA), lasted five months without significant degradation of dynamic range.
Conclusions: While all hydrogels appear to be viable candidates as biocompatible hosts for the SERS sensing chemistry, pHEMA was found to be most functionally stable over the long interval tested. Poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels exhibit the most rapid response to changing pH. Since these two gel types are covalently cross-linked and do not generally degrade, they both offer advantages over sodium alginate for use as implants. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1117/1.JBO.26.9.097001 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2862305188</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2862305188</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-ea12cc839b9231c82e7f9feb719844c095e9190239119303f525d70a10ca3d173</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kU9P3DAQxa2qVfnXD8AFWeqFS1KPnTj2pVJZQSlCQoJWPVpe74Q1SuLUTkB8e4yWUorEaSzN772Z8SNkH1gJAM0XKM-OLkouS10y3TAG78g21JIVnCt4n99MiUJIqbbITko3jDEltfxItkRVgwbNtsnvRehHG30KAw0tvTq-vKLjKR1jWCKNmMYwJEzUthNG2nsXAw7Ojmnu7OSz5s5Paz_Q9f0qhmvsaG-n6B2mPfKhtV3CT091l_w6Of65OC3OL77_WHw7L1wl5VSgBe6cEnqpuQCnODatbnHZgFZV5Ziu8XFPLjSAFky0Na9XDbPAnBUraMQu-brxHedljyuHwxRtZ8boexvvTbDe_N8Z_Npch1ujKlFrBdng8Mkghj8zpsn0PjnsOjtgmJPhdcPzUKl0Rj-_Qm_CHId8nuFKcsFqUCpTsKHyX6UUsX1eBph5jM2AybEZLo02m9iy5uDlFc-KvzlloNwAafT4b-zbjg8Ax6HG</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2862305188</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of SERS pH probe responses after microencapsulation within hydrogel matrices</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>ProQuest Central</source><creator>Kotturi, Dayle ; Paterson, Sureyya ; McShane, Mike</creator><creatorcontrib>Kotturi, Dayle ; Paterson, Sureyya ; McShane, Mike</creatorcontrib><description>Significance: Personalized medicine requires the tracking of an individual’s metabolite levels over time to detect anomalies and evaluate the body’s response to medications. Implanted sensors offer effective means to continuously monitor specific metabolite levels, provided they are accurate, stable over long time periods, and do no harm.
Aim: Four types of hydrogel embedded with pH-sensitive sensors were evaluated for their accuracy, sensitivity, reversibility, longevity, dynamic response, and consistency in static versus dynamic conditions and long-term storage.
Approach: Raman spectroscopy was first used to calibrate the intensity of pH-sensitive peaks of the Raman-active hydrogel sensors in a static pH environment. The dynamic response was then assessed for hydrogels exposed to changing pH conditions within a flow cell. Finally, the static pH response after 5 months of storage was determined.
Results: All four types of hydrogels allowed the surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) sensors to respond to the pH level of the local environment without introducing interfering signals, resulting in consistent calibration curves. When the pH level changed, the probes in the gels were slow to reach steady-state, requiring several hours, and response times were found to vary among hydrogels. Only one type, poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (pHEMA), lasted five months without significant degradation of dynamic range.
Conclusions: While all hydrogels appear to be viable candidates as biocompatible hosts for the SERS sensing chemistry, pHEMA was found to be most functionally stable over the long interval tested. Poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels exhibit the most rapid response to changing pH. Since these two gel types are covalently cross-linked and do not generally degrade, they both offer advantages over sodium alginate for use as implants.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1083-3668</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1560-2281</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1117/1.JBO.26.9.097001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 34519190</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers</publisher><subject>Acids ; Alginic acid ; Anomalies ; Biocompatibility ; Biocompatible Materials ; Calibration ; Dynamic response ; Gels ; Hydrogels ; Hydrogen-Ion Concentration ; Metabolites ; Microencapsulation ; Molecular weight ; Nanoparticles ; pH effects ; Polyethylene glycol ; Polyhydroxyethyl methacrylate ; Precision medicine ; Raman spectroscopy ; Sensing ; Sensitivity analysis ; Sensors ; Sodium ; Sodium alginate ; Spectroscopy ; Spectrum Analysis, Raman</subject><ispartof>Journal of biomedical optics, 2021-09, Vol.26 (9), p.097001-097001</ispartof><rights>The Authors. Published by SPIE under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Unported License. Distribution or reproduction of this work in whole or in part requires full attribution of the original publication, including its DOI.</rights><rights>2021. This work is licensed under https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2021 The Authors 2021 The Authors</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-ea12cc839b9231c82e7f9feb719844c095e9190239119303f525d70a10ca3d173</citedby><orcidid>0000-0001-6838-3982</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2862305188/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2862305188?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,21388,27924,27925,33744,33745,43805,53791,53793,64385,64387,64389,72469,74302</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34519190$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kotturi, Dayle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Sureyya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McShane, Mike</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of SERS pH probe responses after microencapsulation within hydrogel matrices</title><title>Journal of biomedical optics</title><addtitle>J. Biomed. Opt</addtitle><description>Significance: Personalized medicine requires the tracking of an individual’s metabolite levels over time to detect anomalies and evaluate the body’s response to medications. Implanted sensors offer effective means to continuously monitor specific metabolite levels, provided they are accurate, stable over long time periods, and do no harm.
Aim: Four types of hydrogel embedded with pH-sensitive sensors were evaluated for their accuracy, sensitivity, reversibility, longevity, dynamic response, and consistency in static versus dynamic conditions and long-term storage.
Approach: Raman spectroscopy was first used to calibrate the intensity of pH-sensitive peaks of the Raman-active hydrogel sensors in a static pH environment. The dynamic response was then assessed for hydrogels exposed to changing pH conditions within a flow cell. Finally, the static pH response after 5 months of storage was determined.
Results: All four types of hydrogels allowed the surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) sensors to respond to the pH level of the local environment without introducing interfering signals, resulting in consistent calibration curves. When the pH level changed, the probes in the gels were slow to reach steady-state, requiring several hours, and response times were found to vary among hydrogels. Only one type, poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (pHEMA), lasted five months without significant degradation of dynamic range.
Conclusions: While all hydrogels appear to be viable candidates as biocompatible hosts for the SERS sensing chemistry, pHEMA was found to be most functionally stable over the long interval tested. Poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels exhibit the most rapid response to changing pH. Since these two gel types are covalently cross-linked and do not generally degrade, they both offer advantages over sodium alginate for use as implants.</description><subject>Acids</subject><subject>Alginic acid</subject><subject>Anomalies</subject><subject>Biocompatibility</subject><subject>Biocompatible Materials</subject><subject>Calibration</subject><subject>Dynamic response</subject><subject>Gels</subject><subject>Hydrogels</subject><subject>Hydrogen-Ion Concentration</subject><subject>Metabolites</subject><subject>Microencapsulation</subject><subject>Molecular weight</subject><subject>Nanoparticles</subject><subject>pH effects</subject><subject>Polyethylene glycol</subject><subject>Polyhydroxyethyl methacrylate</subject><subject>Precision medicine</subject><subject>Raman spectroscopy</subject><subject>Sensing</subject><subject>Sensitivity analysis</subject><subject>Sensors</subject><subject>Sodium</subject><subject>Sodium alginate</subject><subject>Spectroscopy</subject><subject>Spectrum Analysis, Raman</subject><issn>1083-3668</issn><issn>1560-2281</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kU9P3DAQxa2qVfnXD8AFWeqFS1KPnTj2pVJZQSlCQoJWPVpe74Q1SuLUTkB8e4yWUorEaSzN772Z8SNkH1gJAM0XKM-OLkouS10y3TAG78g21JIVnCt4n99MiUJIqbbITko3jDEltfxItkRVgwbNtsnvRehHG30KAw0tvTq-vKLjKR1jWCKNmMYwJEzUthNG2nsXAw7Ojmnu7OSz5s5Paz_Q9f0qhmvsaG-n6B2mPfKhtV3CT091l_w6Of65OC3OL77_WHw7L1wl5VSgBe6cEnqpuQCnODatbnHZgFZV5Ziu8XFPLjSAFky0Na9XDbPAnBUraMQu-brxHedljyuHwxRtZ8boexvvTbDe_N8Z_Npch1ujKlFrBdng8Mkghj8zpsn0PjnsOjtgmJPhdcPzUKl0Rj-_Qm_CHId8nuFKcsFqUCpTsKHyX6UUsX1eBph5jM2AybEZLo02m9iy5uDlFc-KvzlloNwAafT4b-zbjg8Ax6HG</recordid><startdate>20210901</startdate><enddate>20210901</enddate><creator>Kotturi, Dayle</creator><creator>Paterson, Sureyya</creator><creator>McShane, Mike</creator><general>Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers</general><general>S P I E - International Society for</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QF</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7QQ</scope><scope>7SC</scope><scope>7SE</scope><scope>7SP</scope><scope>7SR</scope><scope>7TA</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7U5</scope><scope>8BQ</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>F28</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H8D</scope><scope>H8G</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>JG9</scope><scope>JQ2</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>L7M</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>L~C</scope><scope>L~D</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6838-3982</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210901</creationdate><title>Comparison of SERS pH probe responses after microencapsulation within hydrogel matrices</title><author>Kotturi, Dayle ; Paterson, Sureyya ; McShane, Mike</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c466t-ea12cc839b9231c82e7f9feb719844c095e9190239119303f525d70a10ca3d173</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Acids</topic><topic>Alginic acid</topic><topic>Anomalies</topic><topic>Biocompatibility</topic><topic>Biocompatible Materials</topic><topic>Calibration</topic><topic>Dynamic response</topic><topic>Gels</topic><topic>Hydrogels</topic><topic>Hydrogen-Ion Concentration</topic><topic>Metabolites</topic><topic>Microencapsulation</topic><topic>Molecular weight</topic><topic>Nanoparticles</topic><topic>pH effects</topic><topic>Polyethylene glycol</topic><topic>Polyhydroxyethyl methacrylate</topic><topic>Precision medicine</topic><topic>Raman spectroscopy</topic><topic>Sensing</topic><topic>Sensitivity analysis</topic><topic>Sensors</topic><topic>Sodium</topic><topic>Sodium alginate</topic><topic>Spectroscopy</topic><topic>Spectrum Analysis, Raman</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kotturi, Dayle</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Paterson, Sureyya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McShane, Mike</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aluminium Industry Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Ceramic Abstracts</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts</collection><collection>Corrosion Abstracts</collection><collection>Electronics & Communications Abstracts</collection><collection>Engineered Materials Abstracts</collection><collection>Materials Business File</collection><collection>Mechanical & Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts</collection><collection>METADEX</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ANTE: Abstracts in New Technology & Engineering</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Aerospace Database</collection><collection>Copper Technical Reference Library</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>Materials Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Computer Science Collection</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies Database with Aerospace</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Academic</collection><collection>Computer and Information Systems Abstracts Professional</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Access via ProQuest (Open Access)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of biomedical optics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kotturi, Dayle</au><au>Paterson, Sureyya</au><au>McShane, Mike</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of SERS pH probe responses after microencapsulation within hydrogel matrices</atitle><jtitle>Journal of biomedical optics</jtitle><addtitle>J. Biomed. Opt</addtitle><date>2021-09-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>26</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>097001</spage><epage>097001</epage><pages>097001-097001</pages><issn>1083-3668</issn><eissn>1560-2281</eissn><abstract>Significance: Personalized medicine requires the tracking of an individual’s metabolite levels over time to detect anomalies and evaluate the body’s response to medications. Implanted sensors offer effective means to continuously monitor specific metabolite levels, provided they are accurate, stable over long time periods, and do no harm.
Aim: Four types of hydrogel embedded with pH-sensitive sensors were evaluated for their accuracy, sensitivity, reversibility, longevity, dynamic response, and consistency in static versus dynamic conditions and long-term storage.
Approach: Raman spectroscopy was first used to calibrate the intensity of pH-sensitive peaks of the Raman-active hydrogel sensors in a static pH environment. The dynamic response was then assessed for hydrogels exposed to changing pH conditions within a flow cell. Finally, the static pH response after 5 months of storage was determined.
Results: All four types of hydrogels allowed the surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) sensors to respond to the pH level of the local environment without introducing interfering signals, resulting in consistent calibration curves. When the pH level changed, the probes in the gels were slow to reach steady-state, requiring several hours, and response times were found to vary among hydrogels. Only one type, poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) (pHEMA), lasted five months without significant degradation of dynamic range.
Conclusions: While all hydrogels appear to be viable candidates as biocompatible hosts for the SERS sensing chemistry, pHEMA was found to be most functionally stable over the long interval tested. Poly(ethylene glycol) hydrogels exhibit the most rapid response to changing pH. Since these two gel types are covalently cross-linked and do not generally degrade, they both offer advantages over sodium alginate for use as implants.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers</pub><pmid>34519190</pmid><doi>10.1117/1.JBO.26.9.097001</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6838-3982</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1083-3668 |
ispartof | Journal of biomedical optics, 2021-09, Vol.26 (9), p.097001-097001 |
issn | 1083-3668 1560-2281 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2862305188 |
source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; ProQuest Central UK/Ireland; PubMed Central; ProQuest Central |
subjects | Acids Alginic acid Anomalies Biocompatibility Biocompatible Materials Calibration Dynamic response Gels Hydrogels Hydrogen-Ion Concentration Metabolites Microencapsulation Molecular weight Nanoparticles pH effects Polyethylene glycol Polyhydroxyethyl methacrylate Precision medicine Raman spectroscopy Sensing Sensitivity analysis Sensors Sodium Sodium alginate Spectroscopy Spectrum Analysis, Raman |
title | Comparison of SERS pH probe responses after microencapsulation within hydrogel matrices |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-19T11%3A11%3A34IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20SERS%20pH%20probe%20responses%20after%20microencapsulation%20within%20hydrogel%20matrices&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20biomedical%20optics&rft.au=Kotturi,%20Dayle&rft.date=2021-09-01&rft.volume=26&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=097001&rft.epage=097001&rft.pages=097001-097001&rft.issn=1083-3668&rft.eissn=1560-2281&rft_id=info:doi/10.1117/1.JBO.26.9.097001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2862305188%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2862305188&rft_id=info:pmid/34519190&rfr_iscdi=true |