CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 293Ultrasound and Cavitation PhenomenaAcoustic Wave Phenomena ResearchUltrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 425 of the 426 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Ultrasound-Responsive Systems as Components for Smart Materials

Open access
Athanassiadis, Athanasios G., Ma, Zhichao, Moreno-Gomez, Nicolas, Melde, Kai, Choi, Eunjin, Goyal, Rahul, Fischer, Peer·2022·Chemical Reviews
DOI 10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00622PMC PMC8915171
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Smart materials can respond to stimuli and adapt their responses based on external cues from their environments. Such behavior requires a way to transport energy efficiently and then convert it for use in applications such as actuation, sensing, or signaling. Ultrasound can carry energy safely and with low losses through complex and opaque media. It can be localized to small regions of space and couple to systems over a wide range of time scales. However, the same characteristics that allow ultrasound to propagate efficiently through materials make it difficult to convert acoustic energy into other useful forms. Recent work across diverse fields has begun to address this challenge, demonstrating ultrasonic effects that provide control over physical and chemical systems with surprisingly high specificity. Here, we review recent progress in ultrasound-matter interactions, focusing on effects that can be incorporated as components in smart materials. These techniques build on fundamental phenomena such as cavitation, microstreaming, scattering, and acoustic radiation forces to enable capabilities such as actuation, sensing, payload delivery, and the initiation of chemical or biological processes. The diversity of emerging techniques holds great promise for a wide range of smart capabilities supported by ultrasound and poses interesting questions for further investigations.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00622

Cites

425 of 425 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Capabilities of smart materials enabled by ultrasound.
Figure 1 Capabilities of smart materials enabled by ultrasound.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 2 Acoustic waves generated by the motion of a boundary. Acoustic waves are mechanical waves of compression and rarefaction in a medium. Within the wave, the local pressure p, density ρ, particle velocity v, and particle displacement ξ vary as a function of time and position, with specific relationships between these variables. Density, pressure, and velocity oscillate in phase, while the displacement is 90° out of phase.
Figure 2 Acoustic waves generated by the motion of a boundary. Acoustic waves are mechanical waves of compression and rarefaction in a medium. Within the wave, the local pressure p, density ρ, particle velocity v, and particle displacement ξ vary as a function of time and position, with specific relationships between these variables. Density, pressure, and velocity oscillate in phase, while the displacement is 90° out of phase.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 3 Methods to shape ultrasound fields. (a) A simple piston transducer approximately produces a plane wave in a uniform medium. (b) When the plane wave transmits into a medium of a different sound speed, refraction causes the wave direction and wavelength to change. (c) A lens can be used to focus plane waves to a point. (d) An acoustic hologram provides more control to turn a plane wave into an arbitrarily shaped pressure field. (e) A resonator can be built to create a high-amplitude patterned pressure field using two opposing transducers or a transducer and a reflector.
Figure 3 Methods to shape ultrasound fields. (a) A simple piston transducer approximately produces a plane wave in a uniform medium. (b) When the plane wave transmits into a medium of a different sound speed, refraction causes the wave direction and wavelength to change. (c) A lens can be used to focus plane waves to a point. (d) An acoustic hologram provides more control to turn a plane wave into an arbitrarily shaped pressure field. (e) A resonator can be built to create a high-amplitude patterned pressure field using two opposing transducers or a transducer and a reflector.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 4 Different mechanisms can be used to convert ultrasonic energy into other forms for useful work. (a) Bubble vibration induced streaming. (b) Microstructure vibration induced streaming. (c) Acoustic streaming induced by acoustic wave propagation and attenuation. (d) Acoustic radiation force. (e) Acoustic contrast factor as a function of particle and fluid properties, with specific values plotted for common acoustic materials in water.
Figure 4 Different mechanisms can be used to convert ultrasonic energy into other forms for useful work. (a) Bubble vibration induced streaming. (b) Microstructure vibration induced streaming. (c) Acoustic streaming induced by acoustic wave propagation and attenuation. (d) Acoustic radiation force. (e) Acoustic contrast factor as a function of particle and fluid properties, with specific values plotted for common acoustic materials in water.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 5 Acoustic patterning and bioassembly. (a) Standing wave trapping of cells in a resonator, (b) Faraday wave patterning, and (c) holographic acoustic patterning.
Figure 5 Acoustic patterning and bioassembly. (a) Standing wave trapping of cells in a resonator, (b) Faraday wave patterning, and (c) holographic acoustic patterning.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 6 Acoustic assembly of cells to form actuators. (a–c) Patterning of fibroblast cells into stripes by standing acoustic wave trapping. Adapted from ref (60). CC BY 4.0. (d–g) Ring-shaped cell structures via Faraday wave patterning. Adapted with permission from ref (66). Copyright 2019 Wiley-VCH.
Figure 6 Acoustic assembly of cells to form actuators. (a–c) Patterning of fibroblast cells into stripes by standing acoustic wave trapping. Adapted from ref (60). CC BY 4.0. (d–g) Ring-shaped cell structures via Faraday wave patterning. Adapted with permission from ref (66). Copyright 2019 Wiley-VCH.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 7 Acoustic assembly of neuronal and simple brain models. The bioassemblies show similar characteristics as the real organs. Native mouse brain (a) with an outer layer of neuron-rich cells and a neurite tract and a layer rich in glial cells. The acoustically assembled cells (b) exhibit similar features. Panels a and b reproduced with permission from ref (66). Copyright 2019 Wiley-VCH. (c, d) An acoustically aggregated brain organoid for Alzheimer’s disease modeling. Neuron inflammation depends on the presence or absence of amyloid-β in the environment. Reproduced with permission from ref (78). Copyright 2020 RSC Publishing.
Figure 7 Acoustic assembly of neuronal and simple brain models. The bioassemblies show similar characteristics as the real organs. Native mouse brain (a) with an outer layer of neuron-rich cells and a neurite tract and a layer rich in glial cells. The acoustically assembled cells (b) exhibit similar features. Panels a and b reproduced with permission from ref (66). Copyright 2019 Wiley-VCH. (c, d) An acoustically aggregated brain organoid for Alzheimer’s disease modeling. Neuron inflammation depends on the presence or absence of amyloid-β in the environment. Reproduced with permission from ref (78). Copyright 2020 RSC Publishing.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 8 Three physical mechanisms provide control over different material properties: (1) pressure waves can modulate the density of a medium, (2) the acoustic radiation force on particles and molecules can modify the microstructure of materials, and (3) the acoustic radiation force can change the shape of an interface.
Figure 8 Three physical mechanisms provide control over different material properties: (1) pressure waves can modulate the density of a medium, (2) the acoustic radiation force on particles and molecules can modify the microstructure of materials, and (3) the acoustic radiation force can change the shape of an interface.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 9 Working principles and examples of acoustically reconfigurable optical systems. (a) Acousto-optic modulator (AOM) used to control the propagation of light via ultrasound-controlled diffraction. The device can be used to redirect light or, with additional optics as shown here, to modulate the beam intensity. (b) Working principle of a cylindrical transient acoustic grating (TAG) lens. When the acoustic field (purple) causes density changes inside the resonator, the associated index of refraction changes bring incident light to a focus. (c) The principles of a TAG lens also help to focus light through a scattering medium. Optical scattering path without and with acoustic field applied. (d) Experimental images of light propagating through a TAG filled with scatterers without (above) and with (bottom) the acoustic field applied. Panels b–d adapted from ref (120). CC BY 4.0. (e) Two liquid deforming interface lens. Reprinted with permission from ref (129). Copyright 2010 OSA Publishing. (f) Large interface deformation activated by acoustic radiation force. Reproduced with permission from ref (130). Copyright 2008 EPL Association. (g) Liquid crystal lens operating principle and physical implementation. Adapted with permission from ref (131). Copyright 2018 AIP Publishing.
Figure 9 Working principles and examples of acoustically reconfigurable optical systems. (a) Acousto-optic modulator (AOM) used to control the propagation of light via ultrasound-controlled diffraction. The device can be used to redirect light or, with additional optics as shown here, to modulate the beam intensity. (b) Working principle of a cylindrical transient acoustic grating (TAG) lens. When the acoustic field (purple) causes density changes inside the resonator, the associated index of refraction changes bring incident light to a focus. (c) The principles of a TAG lens also help to focus light through a scattering medium. Optical scattering path without and with acoustic field applied. (d) Experimental images of light propagating through a TAG filled with scatterers without (above) and with (bottom) the acoustic field applied. Panels b–d adapted from ref (120). CC BY 4.0. (e) Two liquid deforming interface lens. Reprinted with permission from ref (129). Copyright 2010 OSA Publishing. (f) Large interface deformation activated by acoustic radiation force. Reproduced with permission from ref (130). Copyright 2008 EPL Association. (g) Liquid crystal lens operating principle and physical implementation. Adapted with permission from ref (131). Copyright 2018 AIP Publishing.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 10 Reconfigurable phononic crystal formed by the acoustic assembly of polystyrene particles in water. (a) Top and side views of the experimental setup (rendering). Transmission plots through a phononic crystal formed (b) at 2.25 MHz, (c) at 3.75 MHz, or (d) for a random particle mixture. The insets in (b) and (c) show photos of the arranged particles. Adapted with permission from ref (140). Copyright 2014 the Authors.
Figure 10 Reconfigurable phononic crystal formed by the acoustic assembly of polystyrene particles in water. (a) Top and side views of the experimental setup (rendering). Transmission plots through a phononic crystal formed (b) at 2.25 MHz, (c) at 3.75 MHz, or (d) for a random particle mixture. The insets in (b) and (c) show photos of the arranged particles. Adapted with permission from ref (140). Copyright 2014 the Authors.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 11 Microbubbles can be used to measure the mechanical properties of a material. Schemes for two acoustic schemes: (a) short ultrasound pulses push a bubble via the acoustic radiation force and (b) tracking its position over time reveals rheological and elastic properties of the medium. (c) A low amplitude ultrasound wave drives bubble oscillations, and (d) a shift in resonance is an indicator of a changing shear modulus or density.
Figure 11 Microbubbles can be used to measure the mechanical properties of a material. Schemes for two acoustic schemes: (a) short ultrasound pulses push a bubble via the acoustic radiation force and (b) tracking its position over time reveals rheological and elastic properties of the medium. (c) A low amplitude ultrasound wave drives bubble oscillations, and (d) a shift in resonance is an indicator of a changing shear modulus or density.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 12 Operating principles for neural dust. (a) Link efficiency for ultrasound (US) and electromagnetic (EM) coupling through biological tissue versus dimension of the receiver (RX). Ultrasonic links outperform EM links below 1 mm. (b) Schematic for remote sensing of physiological action potentials. The local electric potential influences the backscattering signal of the piezo element. This information can be recovered remotely via ultrasonic imaging. Reproduced with permission from ref (160). Copyright 2018 Elsevier.
Figure 12 Operating principles for neural dust. (a) Link efficiency for ultrasound (US) and electromagnetic (EM) coupling through biological tissue versus dimension of the receiver (RX). Ultrasonic links outperform EM links below 1 mm. (b) Schematic for remote sensing of physiological action potentials. The local electric potential influences the backscattering signal of the piezo element. This information can be recovered remotely via ultrasonic imaging. Reproduced with permission from ref (160). Copyright 2018 Elsevier.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 13 (a) Sensing of gas vesicles inside the gastrointestinal (GI) tract of a mouse: expression of the acoustic reporter gene (ARG) in probiotic bacteria generates gas vesicles that show ultrasound contrast. (b) Ultrasound images of gel phantoms containing E. coli bacteria expressing arg1 before and after collapse of gas vesicles (scale bar 2 mm). (c) Transverse ultrasound image of a mouse colon containing E. coli bacteria expressing arg1 proximal to the colon wall (scale bar 2.5 mm). Panels b and c adapted with permission from ref (169). Copyright 2018 Springer Nature.
Figure 13 (a) Sensing of gas vesicles inside the gastrointestinal (GI) tract of a mouse: expression of the acoustic reporter gene (ARG) in probiotic bacteria generates gas vesicles that show ultrasound contrast. (b) Ultrasound images of gel phantoms containing E. coli bacteria expressing arg1 before and after collapse of gas vesicles (scale bar 2 mm). (c) Transverse ultrasound image of a mouse colon containing E. coli bacteria expressing arg1 proximal to the colon wall (scale bar 2.5 mm). Panels b and c adapted with permission from ref (169). Copyright 2018 Springer Nature.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 14 Microbubbles can be used to transport and release a payload upon ultrasound exposure. (a) Scheme showing the different ways to accommodate the payload in the microbubble structure: (I) using an oil layer, (II) within the shell, (III) via electrostatic binding, and (IV) direct linkage to the surface. (b) Microbubble response to different ultrasound regimes.
Figure 14 Microbubbles can be used to transport and release a payload upon ultrasound exposure. (a) Scheme showing the different ways to accommodate the payload in the microbubble structure: (I) using an oil layer, (II) within the shell, (III) via electrostatic binding, and (IV) direct linkage to the surface. (b) Microbubble response to different ultrasound regimes.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 15 (a) Illustration of drug delivery through an extravascular barrier using phase-changeable nanodroplets. (b) Time-resolved microscope images of PFC nanodroplets before and after ultrasound exposure. Scale bar 50 μm. Reproduced from ref (205). Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society.
Figure 15 (a) Illustration of drug delivery through an extravascular barrier using phase-changeable nanodroplets. (b) Time-resolved microscope images of PFC nanodroplets before and after ultrasound exposure. Scale bar 50 μm. Reproduced from ref (205). Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 16 Mechanism for payload release of nanocarriers. (a) Irreversible and (b) reversible releases of payload from nanocarriers. On the left in (a) and (b) are the initial states of the nanocarriers with the payload on the surface and encapsulated inside, respectively. Irradiation of the nanocarriers with ultrasound (20–90 kHz) induces cavitation, where the emitted shock wave and temperature increase (a) destroy the nanocarrier or (b) temporarily open the structure for the release of the payload.
Figure 16 Mechanism for payload release of nanocarriers. (a) Irreversible and (b) reversible releases of payload from nanocarriers. On the left in (a) and (b) are the initial states of the nanocarriers with the payload on the surface and encapsulated inside, respectively. Irradiation of the nanocarriers with ultrasound (20–90 kHz) induces cavitation, where the emitted shock wave and temperature increase (a) destroy the nanocarrier or (b) temporarily open the structure for the release of the payload.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 17 (a) Plot of the release of fluorescein in solution from a mesoporous silica nanoparticle (MSNP) grafted with a HIFU sensitive block copolymer (10 min and 1.3 MHz, 100 W). (b, c) Fluorescence microscopic images of cells incubated with rhodamine B labeled MSNPs–polymer with fluorescein shown respectively before and after ultrasound exposure. Adapted from ref (251). Copyright 2015 American Chemical Society.
Figure 17 (a) Plot of the release of fluorescein in solution from a mesoporous silica nanoparticle (MSNP) grafted with a HIFU sensitive block copolymer (10 min and 1.3 MHz, 100 W). (b, c) Fluorescence microscopic images of cells incubated with rhodamine B labeled MSNPs–polymer with fluorescein shown respectively before and after ultrasound exposure. Adapted from ref (251). Copyright 2015 American Chemical Society.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 18 (a) Mechanism of sonoporation by ultrasound-induced microbubble cavitation ((I–III) stable cavitation-induced sonoporation; (IV, V) inertial cavitation-induced sonoporation). Adapted with permission from ref (269). Copyright 2014 Elsevier. (b) Cellular uptake of transferrin and fluorescent dextrans of different molecular weights (4.4 and 500 kDa) by endocytosis (no depletion) and diffusional process (ATP depletion) under ultrasonic radiation for 30 s (1 MHz ultrasound, 20 Hz pulse repetition rate, 0.22 MPa peak negative pressure). Reproduced with permission from ref (272). Copyright 2009 Wolters Kluwer Health. (c) Pore size created by sonoporation as a function of ultrasound pressure. Reproduced with permission from ref (277). Copyright 2010 Elsevier. (d) Focused ultrasound induced microbubble cavitation, locally opening the blood–brain barrier for drug transmission. Cavitation can be monitored by an acoustic detector and applied with closed-loop control. Reproduced from ref (284). CC BY 4.0. (e) The nanobubbles can be labeled with paramagnetic particles, enabling a magnetically guided blood–brain barrier opening process. Reproduced with permission from ref (290). Copyright 2014 John Wiley and Sons. (f) In vivo bioluminescent imaging verifies the ultrasound activated microbubbles enhancing gene delivery across the blood–brain barrier. LpDNA, liposome-containing pDNA, MBs, microbubbles, FUS, focused ultrasound. Reproduced with permission from ref (289). Copyright 2016 Elsevier.
Figure 18 (a) Mechanism of sonoporation by ultrasound-induced microbubble cavitation ((I–III) stable cavitation-induced sonoporation; (IV, V) inertial cavitation-induced sonoporation). Adapted with permission from ref (269). Copyright 2014 Elsevier. (b) Cellular uptake of transferrin and fluorescent dextrans of different molecular weights (4.4 and 500 kDa) by endocytosis (no depletion) and diffusional process (ATP depletion) under ultrasonic radiation for 30 s (1 MHz ultrasound, 20 Hz pulse repetition rate, 0.22 MPa peak negative pressure). Reproduced with permission from ref (272). Copyright 2009 Wolters Kluwer Health. (c) Pore size created by sonoporation as a function of ultrasound pressure. Reproduced with permission from ref (277). Copyright 2010 Elsevier. (d) Focused ultrasound induced microbubble cavitation, locally opening the blood–brain barrier for drug transmission. Cavitation can be monitored by an acoustic detector and applied with closed-loop control. Reproduced from ref (284). CC BY 4.0. (e) The nanobubbles can be labeled with paramagnetic particles, enabling a magnetically guided blood–brain barrier opening process. Reproduced with permission from ref (290). Copyright 2014 John Wiley and Sons. (f) In vivo bioluminescent imaging verifies the ultrasound activated microbubbles enhancing gene delivery across the blood–brain barrier. LpDNA, liposome-containing pDNA, MBs, microbubbles, FUS, focused ultrasound. Reproduced with permission from ref (289). Copyright 2016 Elsevier.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 19 Ultrasound can be used to directly trigger or initiate (a, b) chemical and (c) biological processes. (a) Activation of molecular sonosensitizers to produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) via sonoluminiscence. (b) Production of ROS on the surface of inorganic particles via cavitation of nanobubbles. (c) Stimulation of mechanosensitive proteins using the acoustic radiation force.
Figure 19 Ultrasound can be used to directly trigger or initiate (a, b) chemical and (c) biological processes. (a) Activation of molecular sonosensitizers to produce reactive oxygen species (ROS) via sonoluminiscence. (b) Production of ROS on the surface of inorganic particles via cavitation of nanobubbles. (c) Stimulation of mechanosensitive proteins using the acoustic radiation force.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 20 (a) Schematic illustration of ultrasound-induced mechanochemistry using cavitation. Reproduced with permission from ref (330). Copyright 2012 John Wiley and Sons. (b) Reversible assembly and disassembly of Au nanoparticle aggregates bound by a split aptamer. Disassembly took place after 15 s using 20 kHz pulses, while recovery took 30 min. Aggregate structures were tracked by using UV–vis spectroscopy (left) and TEM (right). Scale bar 100 nm. Reproduced with permission from ref (331). Copyright 2021 John Wiley and Sons.
Figure 20 (a) Schematic illustration of ultrasound-induced mechanochemistry using cavitation. Reproduced with permission from ref (330). Copyright 2012 John Wiley and Sons. (b) Reversible assembly and disassembly of Au nanoparticle aggregates bound by a split aptamer. Disassembly took place after 15 s using 20 kHz pulses, while recovery took 30 min. Aggregate structures were tracked by using UV–vis spectroscopy (left) and TEM (right). Scale bar 100 nm. Reproduced with permission from ref (331). Copyright 2021 John Wiley and Sons.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 21 Piezoelectric materials for ultrasound-actuated electrochemical reactions. (a) Schematic for a piezoelectricity-induced chemical reaction: strain in the piezoelectric material generates electrical charges that change the energy state across the material, facilitating electron transfer between the material and the surrounding solution. Adapted with permission from ref (351). Copyright 2015 Elsevier. (b) Result of ultrasound-induced hydrogen production and its correspondence to the presence of piezoelectric material and the applied acoustic power. Adapted with permission from ref (352). Copyright 2019 John Wiley and Sons. (c) Photograph of ultrasound-actuated dye degradation and the experimental evaluation before and after the ultrasonic excitation. Adapted from ref (353). Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society. (d) Ultrasound-triggered generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and its application in tumor therapy. (insets) Digital photos of 4T1-tumor-bearing mice after treatment with ultrasound-activated BaTiO3 nanoparticles (right) and the control group without treatment (left). Adapted with permission from ref (354). Copyright 2020 John Wiley and Sons.
Figure 21 Piezoelectric materials for ultrasound-actuated electrochemical reactions. (a) Schematic for a piezoelectricity-induced chemical reaction: strain in the piezoelectric material generates electrical charges that change the energy state across the material, facilitating electron transfer between the material and the surrounding solution. Adapted with permission from ref (351). Copyright 2015 Elsevier. (b) Result of ultrasound-induced hydrogen production and its correspondence to the presence of piezoelectric material and the applied acoustic power. Adapted with permission from ref (352). Copyright 2019 John Wiley and Sons. (c) Photograph of ultrasound-actuated dye degradation and the experimental evaluation before and after the ultrasonic excitation. Adapted from ref (353). Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society. (d) Ultrasound-triggered generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and its application in tumor therapy. (insets) Digital photos of 4T1-tumor-bearing mice after treatment with ultrasound-activated BaTiO3 nanoparticles (right) and the control group without treatment (left). Adapted with permission from ref (354). Copyright 2020 John Wiley and Sons.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 22 Piezoelectric materials for ultrasound-triggered cell stimulation. (a) Confocal fluorescence microscopy of piezoelectric BaTiO3 nanoparticles (red) attached to neuronal plasma membranes (green). (b) High-amplitude calcium ion transients (green curve) were observed with respect to an ultrasound (US) trigger (time point indicated by arrow) applied to the BaTiO3 nanoparticles (BTNPs). Panels a and b reproduced from ref (359). Copyright 2015 American Chemical Society. (c) Percentages of β3-tubulin positive cells (biomarker indicating differentiation) under different conditions verify the enhanced differentiation under synergistic action of ultrasound and piezoelectric nanoparticles. US–/+, ultrasound off/on; Control, without nanoparticles; P(VDF–TrFE), poly(vinylidene fluoride–trifluoroethylene); BTNPs, BaTiO3 nanoparticles. Reproduced with permission from ref (360). Copyright 2016 John Wiley and Sons.
Figure 22 Piezoelectric materials for ultrasound-triggered cell stimulation. (a) Confocal fluorescence microscopy of piezoelectric BaTiO3 nanoparticles (red) attached to neuronal plasma membranes (green). (b) High-amplitude calcium ion transients (green curve) were observed with respect to an ultrasound (US) trigger (time point indicated by arrow) applied to the BaTiO3 nanoparticles (BTNPs). Panels a and b reproduced from ref (359). Copyright 2015 American Chemical Society. (c) Percentages of β3-tubulin positive cells (biomarker indicating differentiation) under different conditions verify the enhanced differentiation under synergistic action of ultrasound and piezoelectric nanoparticles. US–/+, ultrasound off/on; Control, without nanoparticles; P(VDF–TrFE), poly(vinylidene fluoride–trifluoroethylene); BTNPs, BaTiO3 nanoparticles. Reproduced with permission from ref (360). Copyright 2016 John Wiley and Sons.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 23 (a) Experimental demonstration of acoustic streaming during microbubble oscillation at 24 kHz (scale bar 30 μm). In-plane (b) and out-of-plane (c) rotation of a HeLa cell, driven by an oscillating microbubble at a constant frequency (scale bar 10 μm). Panels a–c reproduced from ref (375). CC BY 4.0. (d) Acoustic streaming vortices generated by oscillating sharp-edge structures rotate (e) a HeLa cell. Panels d and e adapted with permission from ref (376). Copyright 2016 John Wiley and Sons. (f) Structural design and configuration of the acoustics-based human microrobot interface platform (inset scale bar 10 mm) which includes a piezoelectric transducer (white), a glass substrate (yellow), a line-shaped micromanipulator (light blue), and a micro particle transported to the destinations (0, 1, 2, 3). (g) Schematic of particle transportation (right, scanning electron microscopic image of the microparticle, scale bar 10 μm)) and corresponding microscopic images (h) with a time lapse of 2 s (scale bar 50 μm). Panels f–h reproduced from ref (377). Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society. (i) Configuration of the acoustically driven bidirectional micropump. (j, k) Acoustic microstreaming flow induced by different sized bubbles. Panels i–k reproduced with permission from ref (378). Copyright 2020 Springer-Verlag GmbH.
Figure 23 (a) Experimental demonstration of acoustic streaming during microbubble oscillation at 24 kHz (scale bar 30 μm). In-plane (b) and out-of-plane (c) rotation of a HeLa cell, driven by an oscillating microbubble at a constant frequency (scale bar 10 μm). Panels a–c reproduced from ref (375). CC BY 4.0. (d) Acoustic streaming vortices generated by oscillating sharp-edge structures rotate (e) a HeLa cell. Panels d and e adapted with permission from ref (376). Copyright 2016 John Wiley and Sons. (f) Structural design and configuration of the acoustics-based human microrobot interface platform (inset scale bar 10 mm) which includes a piezoelectric transducer (white), a glass substrate (yellow), a line-shaped micromanipulator (light blue), and a micro particle transported to the destinations (0, 1, 2, 3). (g) Schematic of particle transportation (right, scanning electron microscopic image of the microparticle, scale bar 10 μm)) and corresponding microscopic images (h) with a time lapse of 2 s (scale bar 50 μm). Panels f–h reproduced from ref (377). Copyright 2019 American Chemical Society. (i) Configuration of the acoustically driven bidirectional micropump. (j, k) Acoustic microstreaming flow induced by different sized bubbles. Panels i–k reproduced with permission from ref (378). Copyright 2020 Springer-Verlag GmbH.CC BY · PubMed Central
Figure 24 Acoustic microswimmer concepts. (a) Forced body oscillations. Adapted from ref (397). Copyright 2016 American Chemical Society. (b) Asymmetric steady streaming. Reproduced from ref (398). Copyright 2012 American Chemical Society. (c) Bubble streaming. Adapted from ref (399). CC BY-NC 4.0. (d) Acoustic droplet vaporization. Adapted with permission from ref (400). Copyright 2012 John Wiley and Sons. Detailed descriptions of subpanels are in the main text.
Figure 24 Acoustic microswimmer concepts. (a) Forced body oscillations. Adapted from ref (397). Copyright 2016 American Chemical Society. (b) Asymmetric steady streaming. Reproduced from ref (398). Copyright 2012 American Chemical Society. (c) Bubble streaming. Adapted from ref (399). CC BY-NC 4.0. (d) Acoustic droplet vaporization. Adapted with permission from ref (400). Copyright 2012 John Wiley and Sons. Detailed descriptions of subpanels are in the main text.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 426 references

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Leighton T. G., 1994, The Acoustic Bubble
  2. Yosioka K., 1955, Acta Acust. Acust., 5, 167
  3. Gor’kov L. P., 1962, Phys.-Dokl., 6, 773
  4. Doinikov A. A., 2003, Recent Research Developments in Acoustics, 1, 39
  5. Yariv, A. Quantum Electronics, 3rd ed. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: New York, 1989; pp 325–338.
  6. Handbook of Optoelectronics; Dakin, J., Brown, R. G. W., Eds. Taylor & Francis: New York, 2006; pp 1380–1389.
  7. Naugol’nykh, K. A.; Ostrovskiĭ, L. A. Nonlinear Wave Processes in Acoustics; Cambridge Texts in Applied Mathematics; Cambridge University Press: New York, 1998; pp 245–291.
  8. Hamilton M. F., 1986, Nonlinear Wave Propagation in Mechanics
  9. Alekseev V., 1999, Acoust. Phys., 45, 535

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Athanassiadis, A. G., Ma, Z., Moreno-Gomez, N., Melde, K., Choi, E., Goyal, R., & Fischer, P.
Affiliations
  • Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems (DE)
  • Micro, Nano, and Molecular Systems Group, Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Heisenbergstrasse 3, 70569 Stuttgart, Germany
  • University of Stuttgart (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Athanassiadis, Athanasios G.
  • Fischer, Peer
ORCID
Venue
Chemical Reviews
Publisher
American Chemical Society (ACS)
Published
2021-11-12
Volume
122
Issue
5
Pages
5165-5208
ISSN
  • 0009-2665 (ISSN-L)
  • 1520-6890
DOI
10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00622
PMC
PMC8915171
OpenAlex
W3214480262
Cited by
293
References
426
Citations by year
2026: 80 · 2025: 72 · 2024: 65 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 20
FWCI
2.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Chemical Reviews (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung
  • H2020 European Research Council (788296)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Acoustics and Ultrasonics › Ultrasound and Cavitation Phenomena
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Acoustics and Ultrasonics › Acoustic Wave Phenomena Research
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanics of Materials › Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation
Keywords
smart materials, acoustic energy conversion, cavitation, microstreaming, acoustic scattering, acoustic radiation force, ultrasonic sensing, ultrasound-mediated drug delivery
MeSH terms
Smart Materials

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review