Nanomedicine and the Future of Surgery-opinions

[Smilemaker100]

---

Members do not see this ad.

At a recent gathering of friends, I met a graduate student in electrical engineering whose project involves nanomedicine. He is working on the MR-sub project in which researchers are using an MRI to generate magnetic fields which give sufficient propelling power on microscopic robots to travel through blood vessels.

There is theoretical talk on the creation of nanorobotic artificial phagocytes called "microbivores" which could destroy pathogens in the bloodstream as well as cancerous cells and atheromatous plaques.

There is the proposition of introducing "surgical nanorobots" into the vascular system which would be controlled or guided by a human surgeon. These nanorobots could possibly conduct molecular tissue repairs and even engage in the replacement of old chromosomes with new ones.

Just to give you an idea of how important R & D is for nanotechnology in terms of funding, it is estimated that US federal funding will be about $1 billion this year. 😱

I was wondering if anyone in this forum is involved in either research in nanomedicine or has used nanotechnology for some surgical procedures.

Freidas Jr RA "Current Status of Nanomedicine and Medical Nanorobotics" Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience 2005 (2) pgs 1-25

www.nanomedicine.com

 

[footcramp]

sounds like a bunch of pipe to me

 

[Ecthgar]

sounds like a bunch of pipe to me

Agreed......won't see anything like this in our lifetimes.

 

[Stroganoff]

At a recent gathering of friends, I met a graduate student in electrical engineering whose project involves nanomedicine. He is working on the MR-sub project in which researchers are using an MRI to generate magnetic fields which give sufficient propelling power on microscopic robots to travel through blood vessels.

There is theoretical talk on the creation of nanorobotic artificial phagocytes called "microbivores" which could destroy pathogens in the bloodstream as well as cancerous cells and atheromatous plaques.

There is the proposition of introducing "surgical nanorobots" into the vascular system which would be controlled or guided by a human surgeon. These nanorobots could possibly conduct molecular tissue repairs and even engage in the replacement of old chromosomes with new ones.

Just to give you an idea of how important R & D is for nanotechnology in terms of funding, it is estimated that US federal funding will be about $1 billion this year. 😱

I was wondering if anyone in this forum is involved in either research in nanomedicine or has used nanotechnology for some surgical procedures.

Freidas Jr RA "Current Status of Nanomedicine and Medical Nanorobotics" Journal of Computational and Theoretical Nanoscience 2005 (2) pgs 1-25

www.nanomedicine.com

This post made my day. I'm ridiculously interested in nanomedicine, but I'm currently on an imaging/computing BME track in undergrad and have been wondering for months how to power and control vascular nanobots.

Ugh, now I gotta read about it instead of studying. 🙄

Ha.

 

[Misterioso]

sounds like a bunch of pipe to me

Agreed......won't see anything like this in our lifetimes.

They were saying the same things before the first heart transplant!

 

[Hitch]

That's pretty fascinating stuff. Thanks for the link. 👍

 

[Ecthgar]

They were saying the same things before the first heart transplant!

And the head of the National Cancer Institute said 2 years ago that cancer will be cured by 2015. If you want bet on that little piece of info I'd be happy to take your money.

Science moves very slow and with the crisis right now with NIH funding (thanks to our Republican-lead government) its almost coming to a halt.

 

[Sebastian.]

.

 

[Misterioso]

And the head of the National Cancer Institute said 2 years ago that cancer will be cured by 2015. If you want bet on that little piece of info I'd be happy to take your money.

Saying and doing are two different things. The point is that there will always be doubters just like the ones who claimed something like a heart transplant was not possible, that it would never occur in their lifetime, etc. But it did happen.

If the doers listen to the doubters then nothing would get done.

 

[Smilemaker100]

Agreed......won't see anything like this in our lifetimes.

Well, if it's such a bunch of hogwash, explain to me why the US is funding as much as $1 billion this year and the European Commission is setting aside as much as $1.3 billion euros for nanotechnology research for the period 2003-2006? 😱 Also, my brother, who just graduated from electrical engineering, mentioned that some of his classmates did a term project on nanorobotics. Why would engineering students have courses and projects in a field if it is of no use? Obviously , there is *some* rationale for all the "hoopla". 🙄

When Horace Wells claimed that he could induce general anesthesia, many doubted him. When Anton van Leeuwenhoek first described microbes, many doubted him. And I can list many other examples. One has to be open minded to new frontiers in health and technology!

 

[Stroganoff]

The doubters should read up a little on K. Eric Drexler's work and Mark Reed's for a nice intro to the field. Not nanomedicine specifically, but the nature of nanotechnology.

And, since this is a medical website, try to get your paws on Robert Freitas's Nanomedicine textbook series. I have Volume 1 ("Basic Capabilities"), and it is awesome.

The physics and computer science can get pretty intense, but who says anything worth achieving isn't worth struggling over? 😎

 

[DrBowtie]

The technology isn't there since the basic science isn't there. They can create nanotubes/spindles/bundles but they haven't found a way to consistently manipulate them.

 

[Stroganoff]

The technology isn't there since the basic science isn't there. They can create nanotubes/spindles/bundles but they haven't found a way to consistently manipulate them.

That doesn't mean the basic science will not be there within the next decade or two.

 

[solstice118]

What they can do now:

Inject ferromagnetic nanoparticles linked to chemotherapuetics and localize them in different tumor sites so they don't need to use as much chemo. It doesn't work as well as they want it to but I think in the next 5-10 years it will as efficacious as it's going to be. Look at Alexiuo et al. stuff.

Quantum Dots used as a fluorescent marker for Sentinel LN and other things. The tissue penetration of this imaging is still being worked out but they are doing alot of things with Near Infrared Technology and it looks promising in animal studies. The problem is the QDs are made with heavy metals ie Cadmium and so likely won't be used as much as Nanoshells. (Frangioni et al stuff)

Nanoshells (Halas and West) are probably the winner in this crew for Cool appeal. The can be used for biomarkers and imaged in vivo using near infra red (using fancy computer subraction techniques). They can also be heated for thermal destruction of tumors (using a more powerful intensity of light source (also in the Near Infrared)). No damage to tissue that wasn't labeled to these nanoshells and the labeling is pretty darn specific.

Nanotubes are also being worked up. Same sorts of properties as nanoshells but there are some groups also tagging them to gadolinium so that you can also use MRI but this is still being worked up.

As for little vascular robots that do our bidding... You never know 20-30 years down the line. Conceptually it will probably involve exquisite magnetic control of particles and their manipulation using standard imaging techniques/novel imaging.

This technology is definitely in the future of medicine and surgery though.

 

[DrBowtie]

That doesn't mean the basic science will not be there within the next decade or two.

I agree that they will get there, but the timeline right now is iffy.

 

[cooldreams]

timeline?? blah... our knowledge in science DOUBLES every 2-3 yrs, and that rate is accelerating. the advent of computers changed everything....

nanotech in our lifetimes? its a sure bet. the nsa is already into it deep. what they know and are doing we wont even hear of until 3-4+ yrs after they are done with it...

 

[Zoom-Zoom]

I agree. I would be willing to bet that nanotech will go places in my lifetime. It might take 50 years, but it will happen.