Quantitative Investigation into the influence of intravenous fluids on human immune and cancer cell lines

Abstract

The effect of intravenous fluids (IVF) has been investigated clinically through the assessment of posttreatment reactions. However, the responses to IVF vary from patient-to-patient. It is important to understand the response of IVF treatment to be able to provide optimal IVF care. Herein, we investigated the impact of commonly used IVFs, Dextrose, NaCl and Ringer on different human cancer (HepG2 (liver hepatocellular carcinoma) and MCF7 (breast adenocarcinoma)) and immune cell lines (U937 (lymphoma) monocyte and macrophages). The effect of IVF exposure on single cells was characterized using hemocytometer, fluorescence microscopy and flow cytometry. Quantitative data on the viability and morphology of the cells were obtained. Our results emphasize that different IVFs demonstrate important differences in how they influence distinct cell lines. Particularly, we observed that the lactated ringer and dextrose solutions altered the viability and nuclear size of cancer and immune cells differently. Our findings present valuable information to the knowledge of cellular-level IVF effects for further investigations in IVF usage on diverse patient populations and support the importance and necessity of developing optimal diluents not only for drug stability but also for patient benefits.

Investigating influences of intravenous fluids on HUVEC and U937 monocyte cell lines using the magnetic levitation method

“…Sterile IV fluids were purchased from Polifarma (Turkey); polifleks 9% isotonic NaCl solution (308 mOsm L −1 ) in a 250 mL package, 5% dextrose solution (277.47 mOsm L −1 ), and lactated Ringer's solution (275.52 mOsm L −1 ) in a 500 mL packages. 6…”

“…6,15–19 Although these methods have made significant contributions and established the gold standards for quantifying the deformation, shape or morphology of single cells, they have also presented some disadvantages, such as exposing cells to high shear stresses (flow cytometry, microfluidics), limited throughput (AFM, microscopic approaches), labelled manipulation (fluorescently activated cell sorting), expensive fabrication, and difficulty in operation (microfluidic platforms). 6,17–20…”

“…Although the majority of these studies have focused on the impact of IV fluids on patient outcomes in the critical care practice, the investigations on their influences on different types of cells at single-cell resolution are very limited. 6 Among these studies, Lahsaee and coworkers reported that IV fluids have specific effects on blood flow and cells. 7 Chiba's group reported an in vivo analysis of the influence of Ringer's lactate solution on blood flow and showed that Ringer's lactate solution increased fluid volume, eruptive movement, and intra-socket pressure.…”

“…12 While monitoring the deformation and density changes of the cells have been investigated to determine the status of the cells, the studies on IV fluids by quantifying the deformation and densities of single cells is very limited. 6,13,14 In the literature, mostly microscopy techniques (atomic force microscopy (AFM), electron microscopy, and optical microscopy), flow cytometry, and microfluidic platforms either alone or in conjunction with optical imaging systems have been used to determine the morphology, shape, deformation, and density measurements of single cells. 6,[15][16][17][18][19] Although these methods have made significant contributions and established the gold standards for quantifying the deformation, shape or morphology of single cells, they have also presented some disadvantages, such as exposing cells to high shear stresses (flow cytometry, microfluidics), limited throughput (AFM, microscopic approaches), labelled manipulation (fluorescently activated cell sorting), expensive fabrication, and difficulty in operation (microfluidic platforms).…”

“…6,13,14 In the literature, mostly microscopy techniques (atomic force microscopy (AFM), electron microscopy, and optical microscopy), flow cytometry, and microfluidic platforms either alone or in conjunction with optical imaging systems have been used to determine the morphology, shape, deformation, and density measurements of single cells. 6,[15][16][17][18][19] Although these methods have made significant contributions and established the gold standards for quantifying the deformation, shape or morphology of single cells, they have also presented some disadvantages, such as exposing cells to high shear stresses (flow cytometry, microfluidics), limited throughput (AFM, microscopic approaches), labelled manipulation (fluorescently activated cell sorting), expensive fabrication, and difficulty in operation (microfluidic platforms). 6,[17][18][19][20] In order to eliminate some of these drawbacks, we implemented the magnetic levitation technique to reveal the influence of IV fluids on single cells.…”