Nanorobots in Medicine

1. Nanorobots in Medicine Aziz Daabash Brett Michalk Amanda Mogollon Derek Nelson

2. What are Nanorobotics ? How Nanorobots Work ? Imagine going to the doctor to get treatment for a persistent fever. Instead of giving you a pill or a shot, the doctor refers you to a special medical team which implants a tiny robot into your bloodstream. The robot detects the cause of your fever, travels to the appropriate system and provides a dose of medication directly to the infected area. Surprisingly, we're not that far off from seeing devices like this actually used in medical procedures.

3. Applications • Treating arteriosclerosis • Fighting cancer • Helping the body clot • Parasite Removal • Gout "the disease of kings" • Breaking up kidney stones • Cleaning wounds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7zw9fvfBZI

4. Motivation • The Problem: • Diabetes Patients must take small blood samples many times a day (uncomfortable and inconvenient). • The need for constant glucose monitoring.

5. Motivation • The solution: • Painless • Reduces patients time spent suffering from hyperglycemia • Monitor glucose at different locations • Determine damage to specific tissue • “Onboard sensors”

6. Methods • Computational nanotechnology • Simulation • Physical parameters • Device design Focus of this work is to study the interaction and sensing characteristics of nanorobots using NCD (nanorobot control design) software.

7. Computationalnanotechnology • Powerful tool for designing devices at nanoscale. • Research on using nanosensors in therapeutic treatments and medical instrumentation. • Kinematic aspects for propulsion about nanorobots inside-body locomotion.

8. Simulation • List of positions and orientations of all objects in the task environment. • List includes : all information relevant to the nanorobots interactions. • Introduces RBCs with the fluid. • Simulator includes: • Physical behavior • Sensory information • Visual display of the environment • Monitor glycemic levels

9. Physical parameters • Genome analysis used to identify SGLT3 . • What is SGLT3 ? • Along with other functions , responsible for regulating extracellular glucose concentration. serves as a transducer. • Chemical biosensors to determine any medical action required. • Nanobioelectronics as prototyping methodology for hardware architecture. Characteristics of nanorobots: Biocompatibility Chemosensor CMOS IC nanobiosensor

10. Device design • Nanorobot: • Exterior consists of carbon metal nanocomposites (diamond-like). • Artificial glycocalyx surface . • Integrated nanoelectronicsfor (RFID) CMOS transponder system. • 3-D microenvironment : • 3D real time visualization • Physical shape discription • Physiological fluid flow patterns

11. Nanorobot Architecture How should the nanorobot be designed? Integrated Circuit SIMPLICITY!

12. Integrated Circuit Block Diagram

13. Nanorobot Architecture What materials should be used? • CNTs in CMOS used as a nanobiosensor • Relaxed SiGe • Reduce self-heating • Improves performance

14. Nanorobot Architecture How will it be powered?

15. Nanorobot Architecture How will the data be transmitted? -Acoustic -Light

16. Nanorobot Safety Will nanorobots react in our body? Choose a proper membrane polymer material to prevent the action of enzymes.

17. Nanorobot Safety How will you get the nanorobots out of your body? Enzymes inside the nanorobot can be released once a signal has been sent.

18. Advantages • 3 samples of blood daily vs. once every 90 days • Reliability • Comfort

19. Results • Simulated environment : 36 C , pH of 7.4 • BGLs are transferred every 2 hours • Biosensor achieved 90% of steady state signal in 90 ms • Every 2 hours sensor is activated for 2 minutes.

20. Conclusions • Use of nanorobots in the medical field is more precise and efficient than conventional medical practices • Nanorobots enable a more effective diabetes treatment • 3-D simulators can be used as nanomechatronic systems that provide physical and numerical information for nanorobot task-based modeling • Medical nanorobots may be buildable 10-20 years from today using an advanced molecular manufacturing technology

21. Further Research • More functions should be included in the nanorobot. • Consider how the electrical impulse in our body will affect the electrical components of the nanorobot. • Make technology accessible to the public (optimize cost)

22. References • A. Cavalcanti et el. Medical nanorobotics for diabetes control • A. Ummat et al. Nanorobotics • A. Cavalcanti, B. Shirinzadeh, T. Fukuda, S. Ikeda. Nanorobot for Brain Aneurysm • A. Cavalcanti, Assembly Automation with Evolutionary Nanorobots and Sensor-Based Control applied to Nanomedicine

23. Questions?

24. Team U4 RebuttalNanoRobots in medicine Team U4: • Aziz Daabash • Brett Michalk • Amanda Mogollon • Derek Nelson http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/bst/lowres/bstn464l.jpg

25. Effective areas : • The presentation was well organized and Informative. • Interesting topic that has a huge potential in the medical field. • Showing appropriate YouTube videos, nice and innovative use of graphics. • Oral presentation and eye contact. • Both presenters looked professional and dressed up. • Speakers were knowledgeable of subject and had done a good amount of research on the topic. • Innovative discussion of further research (ie. Use of iphone for energy supply) • Our answers to the following comments: • How nanorobots operate/move (further discussion) This was mentions on slides 14 and 15. • Showing pictures of actual nanorobots instead of computer generated ones Nanorobots do not exist yet , current research is only based on theory and computer simulations. • Choose one particular nanorobot our presentation specifically explained medical nanorobots for drug delivery. • References and pictures citations are missing: references were shown at the end of the presentation, as for the picture citation, the wrong slides were update to the class website. • Outline of the presentation is missing. we have orally mentioned the outline of the presentation at the beginning of the lecture.

26. Didn’t mention nanorobot safety and future applications. nanorobot safety was discussed , refer to slide 16. nanorobots ARE future applications that haven't been produced yet. • Improve transitions flow. after the first speaker finished his section he proceeded to shif the presentation to the next presenter by introducing their name and what will they be talking about. • What types of nanorobots are proposed and what are their potential uses for each type? as mentioned in the presentation , the proposed nanorobots were propsed to be used as drug delivery method, as for their specific technical type, the research paper did not mention any information related to this. • Are there any methods in fabricating/manufacturing these nanorobots suggested? the researched paper had no information on how these nanorobots fabricated/manufactured. • I would like to know more about the relaxed SiGe integration into the nanorobot fabrication. details about the relaxed SiGe integration into the nanorobot fabrication was not mentioned in the researched paper. But further information can be found at the following link: http://www.nanorobotdesign.com/papers/cancer.pdf page 2

27. Are the nanorobots actively activated or passively activated? How can these robots do their functions if they are coated in an enzyme that will nullify the activation of antibodies in the bloodstream? Will it somehow open up the cover and work on the parts of the body? Is that any potential harm in the body? we have mentioned in class that these robots use enzyme reaction to target specific tissue or cells of the body to deliver the drug , specific amino acid sequance will trigger the activation of these nanorobots. Potential harm of these nanorobots was mentioned in the slides, refer to slides 16 and 17. • Areas of improvement: • Text size was too small on some slides and some slides were too busy. • References • inconsistent font size and style. • Some hesitation at the beginning of the presentation.

28. Review of U4 presentationNanorobots Submitted by U1

29. Positive Aspects • Well organized • Included an outline of the presentation • Followed outline • Slides titles matched outline • Informative • How they work • Applications

30. Negative Aspects • Text size • Too small on some slides • Some slides are too busy • Too much text/too small • Should split into several slides • References • Should show when background information stops and paper review begins

31. Possible further discussion • More info on how nanorobots operate/move • Show pictures of actual nanorobots instead of artists’ renditions • Choose one particular nanorobot to explain in detail in addition to the generalities provided.

32. Review of Group U4’s Presentation- Nanorobots in Medicine By Group U2: -Kyle Demel -Keaton Hamm -Bryan Holekamp -Rachael Houk http://www.foresight.org/nanomedicine/gallery/Images/alveoli.jpg

33. The presenters did really well at: • Showing appropriate YouTube videos • Nice and innovative use of graphics • Explaining the content of the slides • Oral presentation was very thorough • Making eye contact with the audience The presenters could improve at: • Making similar slides more consistent- • Titles and text were different sizes • Different formats: paragraph, bullets... • Cite all pictures and graphics • Outline in beginning of presentation- • What will you talk about? • In what order will you talk about it? • Parts of presentation felt out of order • Perhaps discuss nanorobot safety and architecture after finishing the results and conclusion of article • Discuss additional future applications http://www.christmastree.org/youtube.jpg http://www2.ensi-bourges.fr/ws_nanorobotics/MR-2048-large.jpg http://www.technovelgy.com/graphics/content/cell-repair-nanorobot2.jpg

34. Group U3 Review Nanorobots in Medicine

35. Technical Review • Great attention getter (first slide) • 3d visualization pictures were very helpful • Some of the font could have been enlarged • Further research section could have been more detailed • Explain a few of the pictures more thoroughly

36. Oral Presentation • Very educational and informative presentation • Great eye contact • Both presenters looked professional and dressed up • Could improve on making transitions flow a little smoother

37. Nanorobots in Medicine • Review of Team U4 by Team U5 – • Jaynesh Shah • Greg Pudewell, • Edwin L. Youmsi Pete • John Pack.

38. Oral and Quality of Slides Review • Speakers did a good job in the oral aspect of the presentation. They were loud and clear confident. Implying they had done a good amount of research on the topic. • The slides clear, visible and not overcrowded. Team U4 made good use of several pictures, images and graphs.

39. Technical Review • The presentation was satisfying from a technical standpoint • We would have liked them to discuss the use of nanorobots in conjunction with the iPhone or other electronic devices more

40. Nano-Robots Presented by: Group U4 Critiqued by: Group U6

41. Critique: Oral Presentation & Slides • Slides were very easy to read • good background and font color • The use of illustrations complimented the text • Figures were relevant to the topic on the slide, and helped convey key points • Speakers had good voice projection to the back of the room • Speakers did well in maintaining eye contact most of the time • However, there was a little hesitation in giving the lecture – maybe more practice would help

42. Critique – Technical Content • Excellent topic – will be relevant for millions of people worldwide • Research paper was based on theoretical simulations only – further research needs to be done to increase the functionality of the nano-robots • Introduction and explanation of research paper was excellent, and presented in a way which was very easy to understand • We personally thought that the use of cell phones to charge the robots and receive information from the robots was very innovative

43. Review for U4 Jung Hwan Woo

44. Review • What types of nanorobots are proposed and what are their potential uses for each type? • Are there any methods in fabricating/manufacturing these nanorobotssuggested? • I would like to know more about the relaxed SiGe integration into the nanorobot fabrication. • Are the nanorobots actively activated or passively activated? • How can these robots do their functions if they are coated in an enzyme that will nullify the activation of antibodies in the bloodstream? Will it somehow open up the cover and work on the parts of the body? Is that any potential harm in the body? • What kind of software is currently used to simulate these nanorobots?