Ramblings of an old Doc
Published on February 27, 2011 By DrJBHL In Personal Computing

 

The Israeli 'Technion' and The College of Judea and Samaria have developed a new nanobot that will be able to navigate inside the human body with external, wireless guidance!

In the last few years scientists have been making efforts to minimize robots so they will aid medical procedures: Robots are already involved in spinal surgeries today, and this new nanobot will hopefully be involved in new highly accurate medical procedures allowing minimal tissue damage.

The nanobot, developed by Professor Moshe Shoham of the Technion-Israel Institute of Technology in Haifa, is only one millimeter in diameter and is equipped with small appendages allowing it to hold position in tubes of different diameters and against blood flow. Important to note is that those small blood vessels aren’t the only small tubules in the body, so it’s use might well be beyond that originally envisaged.

The nanobot receive power from an electromagnetic field created close to the patient's body, allowing it to operate for a long time.

These features will make it possible for it to venture through our veins and arteries in any direction in order to reach the right spot and conduct the relevant procedures.

So far, the University of Kyoto in Japan has a nanobot one centimeter in diameter (ten times the size of the Israeli one, and not practical for small blood vessels. Since this model is significantly larger than the Israeli one, it is less appropriate for use in our circulatory system and in other narrow passages in the human body. 

The Israeli nanobot may have a wide variety of uses, such as focused medicine release useful in cancer treatment. Another major advantage is that it will be possible to activate several nanobots simultaneously, attending to multiple problems at the same time!

Although it has already been designed and built, the nanobot is far from being an operational model at this point.   

More information on the development can be found on the Technion's website. Also, the actual robots in use today for prostate and spinal surgery don’t look anything like this:

Nano Cancer Fighters

Sangeeta Bhatia is an MIT biological engineer, and she gets to turn sci-fi into reality, developing nanoparticles programmed to make a beeline for cancer cells and release chemotherapy drugs nearby. This is another direction of research, as is carbon micro/nanotubules.

From one of her many interviews:

“How did you get into developing microscopic disease-fighters?
At MIT, I did my Ph.D. on how to use microfabrication tools--which had previously been used for building semiconductor chips--for tissue engineering to restore liver function. Then I got more broadly interested in the idea that there were all these ways to make tiny body parts using nanotechnology that people had developed for making paints and computers and things.
And now you make nano­particles that vanquish cancer cells. How are they better than plain old chemo?
The particles have substances on their surfaces that make them home in on the cancer--one type contains a peptide that binds to proteins found in a tumor's vessel linings. This represents a new frontier in that you're taking the toxic chemotherapy cargo directly to the tumor, so you don't get the side effects of delivering a poison throughout the entire body.
When will this treatment be available to patients? Things like this take anywhere from five to 10 years to get FDA approval. In the meantime, we're also developing materials that can track what tumors are doing--whether they're becoming more invasive or getting ready to metastasize. We'd like to treat the cancer before it spreads.”

Also of note is that these nanoparticles can adhere to eachother and may well be usable to clot off the blood supply to tumors, and to cause the blood vessels supplying them to wither.

Additional reading: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/body/bhatia-biomedicine-au.html

http://fluidicmems.com/2010/12/07/129-sangeeta-bhatia-talks-at-mit-on-cooperative-nanosystems-for-cancer-diagnosis-and-therapy/


Comments (Page 1)
2 Pages1 2 
on Feb 27, 2011

Cool stuff.

on Feb 27, 2011

This is brilliant news indeed. Just hope they keep up the good work and introduce these things into practical medicine as soon as possible. It has potential to save many, many lives.

on Feb 27, 2011

Indeed it does. 

on Feb 27, 2011

Hopefully it won't cost two arms and a leg and the insurance companies accept it. If they refuse to cover it then its just another super expensive procedure most won't be able to afford. IMO

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it. But the cost of R&D has got to be high. Nano technology may no longer be in its infancy but it still has a ways to go yet. One thing is good though. Once perfected and approved by the FDA the potential is enormous!

on Feb 27, 2011

You're assuming this technology will make it through without the gray goo people killing it.

on Feb 27, 2011

Then lets test it on them first. Maybe they'll go away after their innards get skewed.

on Feb 27, 2011

Those are not nanobots, nor is that nanotechnology. These machines are far too big to be classified as such.

Now, the gold cancer zapping nanoparticals... that is nanotechnology.  (mostly)

on Feb 27, 2011

Yeah, 1mm is still on the big side, but this is definitely much more useful, compared to 1cm stuff. And i can see in year or 2 making it again 10x smaller....how big is the average cell by the way? I suppose this varies, but i wonder how small will need the nanobot to be to kill the cells on the cell level, i mean not just bigger agregates of cells, but target and kill single cell? Anyway this would probably require tracking method with such precision/resolution at first...

The grey goo thing is BS until the nanobots can somehow selfreplicate, which i do not see as possible in near future (maybe never).

on Feb 27, 2011

fabulous stuff... always good to hear of promising things on the horizon...

on Feb 27, 2011

Yeah, 1mm is still on the big side, but this is definitely much more useful, compared to 1cm stuff. And i can see in year or 2 making it again 10x smaller....how big is the average cell by the way? I suppose this varies, but i wonder how small will need the nanobot to be to kill the cells on the cell level, i mean not just bigger agregates of cells, but target and kill single cell? Anyway this would probably require tracking method with such precision/resolution at first...
This idea of targeted cell-killing has a few interesting loose ends, which you may or may not have already thought of. The first is that the nanobot need not be the size of a cell ti kill it- only its appendages need be that small. The second is that killing a single cell of anything is more or less pointless, medically speaking (I can't think of any times it would be relevant off the top of my head, but there are probably one or two). You would need a whole massive swarm of millions of nanobots, which would be AWFULLY tough to control unless they were more or less autonomous. If they were, however, they could very easily become a cybernetic immune system.

on Mar 01, 2011

Scoutdog
Yeah, 1mm is still on the big side, but this is definitely much more useful, compared to 1cm stuff. And i can see in year or 2 making it again 10x smaller....how big is the average cell by the way? I suppose this varies, but i wonder how small will need the nanobot to be to kill the cells on the cell level, i mean not just bigger agregates of cells, but target and kill single cell? Anyway this would probably require tracking method with such precision/resolution at first...This idea of targeted cell-killing has a few interesting loose ends, which you may or may not have already thought of. The first is that the nanobot need not be the size of a cell ti kill it- only its appendages need be that small. The second is that killing a single cell of anything is more or less pointless, medically speaking (I can't think of any times it would be relevant off the top of my head, but there are probably one or two). You would need a whole massive swarm of millions of nanobots, which would be AWFULLY tough to control unless they were more or less autonomous. If they were, however, they could very easily become a cybernetic immune system.

Yes, one nanobot could not kill enough 'malware' cells to effictivly treat an infection.  But one could be used to release a drug that targets the malware cells without killing cells all over the body (as chemo and radiation) theripies currently do.  Also, a fre of these bots could reopen clogged vessels more easially tha current techs.  I can imagine many uses for them.   I am so happy to see some tech being used to better our lives

on Mar 01, 2011

 Scoutdog and Elana...from the OP:

And now you make nano­particles that vanquish cancer cells. How are they better than plain old chemo?
The particles have substances on their surfaces that make them home in on the cancer--one type contains a peptide that binds to proteins found in a tumor's vessel linings. This represents a new frontier in that you're taking the toxic chemotherapy cargo directly to the tumor, so you don't get the side effects of delivering a poison throughout the entire body.

 

No one is talking about one bot for each cell.

 

 

on Mar 01, 2011

It seems that this has already been done - in the borg collective!

It is fascinating to see how far they have come in such a relatively short time!

on Mar 01, 2011

Dr Guy
It seems that this has already been done - in the borg collective!

It is fascinating to see how far they have come in such a relatively short time!

Please tell me that that first part is in jest. PLEASE.

 

@OP- brilliant stuff. Now, for them to come up with nanocircuitry implants that will allow me to carry a computer in my brain.

on Mar 02, 2011

Please tell me that that first part is in jest. PLEASE.

Check the Emoticon at the end of the sentence.

2 Pages1 2