This Title All WIREs
How to cite this WIREs title:
WIREs Nanomed Nanobiotechnol
Impact Factor: 9.182

Therapeutic gas delivery strategies

Full article on Wiley Online Library:   HTML PDF

Can't access this content? Tell your librarian.

Abstract Gas molecules with pharmaceutical effects offer emerging solutions to diseases. In addition to traditional medical gases including O2 and NO, more gases such as H2, H2S, SO2, and CO have recently been discovered to play important roles in various diseases. Though some issues need to be addressed before clinical application, the increasing attention to gas therapy clearly indicates the potentials of these gases for disease treatment. The most important and difficult part of developing gas therapy systems is to transport gas molecules of high diffusibility and penetrability to interesting targets. Given the particular importance of gas molecule delivery for gas therapy, distinguished strategies have been explored to improve gas delivery efficiency and controllable gas release. Here, we summarize the strategies of therapeutic gas delivery for gas therapy, including direct gas molecule delivery by chemical and physical absorption, inorganic/organic/hybrid gas prodrugs, and natural/artificial/hybrid catalyst delivery for gas generation. The advantages and shortcomings of these gas delivery strategies are analyzed. On this basis, intelligent gas delivery strategies and catalysts use in future gas therapy are discussed. This article is categorized under: Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Emerging Technologies Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Nanomedicine for Oncologic Disease
Typical examples of gaseous physisorption (a–d) and chemisorption (e–h) with various carriers. (a) NO gas delivery by MIP‐177 (Pinto et al., 2020); (b) O2 gas delivery by UiO‐[email protected]@RBC (Gao et al., 2018); (c) O2 gas delivery by [email protected] (Cheng et al., 2015); (d) H2 gas delivery by [email protected] (He et al., 2017); (e) NO gas delivery by MIL‐88 (McKinlay et al., 2013); (f) NO gas delivery by TIFSIX‐2‐Cu‐I (Haikal et al., 2017); (g) H2S gas delivery by CPO‐27 (Allan et al., 2012); (h) NO gas delivery by zeolite‐A (Wheatley et al., 2006)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Typical hybrid catalyst delivery systems. (a) Cd0.9Se0.1S/[email protected] QDs‐anchored and hydrogenase‐expressed curli fibers for hydrogen generation (Wang et al., 2019); (b) the hydrogenase mimic‐porphyrin conjugation (Song et al., 2006); (c) the Re carbonyl compounds and hydrogenase mimic encapsulated micelle (Wang et al., 2010)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Enzyme delivery for gas generation. (a) The microalga‐encapsulated photocatalytic oxygen‐generating patch for wound healing (H. Chen, Cheng, et al., 2020); (b) localized delivery of NO to the conventional outflow pathway (Chandrawati et al., 2017)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Photocatalytic strategy for gas delivery. (a) NO gas delivery by [email protected]E. coli (D.‐W. Zheng, Chen, et al., 2018); (b) H2 gas delivery by CIT‐UCNP‐AuNPs‐Chlα@Lip (Wan et al., 2020); (c) CO gas delivery by HisAgCCN (Zheng et al., 2017); (d) H2 gas delivery by SnS1.68‐WO2.41 (Zhao et al., 2021)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Typical photo/sound responsive gas prodrugs for gas delivery. (a,b) Photo‐triggered CO release based on BODIPY and its mechanism (Palao et al., 2016); (c,d) US‐triggered NO release based on BNN and its mechanism (Jin, Wen, Hu, et al., 2017)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Typical click reaction‐based prodrugs for gas delivery. (a) Unimolecular prodrug for CO delivery (Ji et al., 2016); (b) unimolecular prodrug for SO2 delivery (Ji, El‐Labbad, et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2017); (c) click reaction based H2S delivery (Steiger et al., 2017)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Typical redox‐based gas prodrugs for gas delivery. (a) RSH triggered H2S delivery (Citi et al., 2014; Martelli et al., 2013; Martelli et al., 2014); (b) RSH triggered SO2 delivery (Malwal et al., 2012); (c) GSH triggered NO delivery (Kao et al., 2017)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]
Gas delivered by metal‐gas prodrugs. (a) Water soluble metal‐gas prodrug for CO delivery based on B12‐MnCORM‐1 (Zobi et al., 2013); (b) legends induced red shifting in absorbance (Carrington et al., 2013); (c) NIR responsive Me‐RBS for NO delivery (L. Chen, He, et al., 2017); (d) NIR responsive PPIX‐RSE for NO delivery (Wecksler et al., 2006); (e) NIR responsive PdH0.2 for H2 delivery (Zhao et al., 2018); (f) NIR responsive Pd‐MOF for H2 delivery (Zhou et al., 2019); (g) ROS responsive [email protected] for CO delivery (Jin, Wen, Xiong, et al., 2017); (h) ROS responsive FeCO‐[email protected]@HA for CO delivery (Meng et al., 2020)
[ Normal View | Magnified View ]

Browse by Topic

Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Nanomedicine for Oncologic Disease
Therapeutic Approaches and Drug Discovery > Emerging Technologies

Access to this WIREs title is by subscription only.

Recommend to Your
Librarian Now!

The latest WIREs articles in your inbox

Sign Up for Article Alerts