Advertisement

Different Approaches Used in Modeling of Cell Membrane Electroporation

  • Clair PoignardEmail author
  • Aude Silve
  • Lars Wegner
Living reference work entry

Abstract

Cell electroporation is a complex phenomenon, which consists in the emergence of defects in cell membranes subjected to electric pulses. Since the end of the 1990s, biophysical models have been developed to explain and predict the conditions for cell electroporation. However the recent biological data, in particular those dealing with the influence of the repetition rate of the pulses, challenge these biophysical models. In this chapter, different approaches to model electropore formation are presented. The simplest equivalent circuit model is first presented. Biophysical approaches, which are extensively presented in chapter “Electropore Energy and Thermodynamics,” are rapidly overviewed. For each approach, advantages and disadvantages are also discussed, in terms of physical meaning and validation with the experimental data. Then phenomenological approach is introduced. Such approaches consist in designing the model on an empirical basis thanks to the experience. Even though the physical bases of such models are still lacking, they provide new interesting views on the electroporation processes, as described by the experiments. The aim of the chapter is to introduce the reader to different ways of modeling cell membrane electroporation and to provide some possible directions to obtain a more reliable theory of electroporation in accordance with the experiments and with a justified theoretical basis.

Keywords

Cell electroporation modeling Biophysical and mathematical models for pore formation 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This study has been carried out with financial support from the French State, managed by the French National Research Agency (ANR) in the frame of the “Investments for the future,” Programme IdEx Bordeaux, CPU (ANR-10-IDEX-03-02).

Numerical simulations presented in this paper were carried out using the PLAFRIM experimental testbed, being developed under the Inria PlaFRIM development action with support from LABRI and IMB and other entities: Conseil Régional d’Aquitaine, FeDER, Université de Bordeaux, and CNRS (see https://plafrim.bordeaux.inria.fr/).

C.P. is partly granted by the Plan Cancer project DYNAMO (9749 Inserm), and the Plan Cancer project NUMEP (11099 Inserm). C.P. is also member of the European lab of CNRS, LEA EBAM, on electroporation.

References

  1. Bray A (2002) Theory of phase-ordering kinetics. Adv Phys 51:481–587MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dermol J, Pakhomova O, Pakhomov A, Miklavčič D (2016) Cell electrosensitization exists only in certain electroporation buffers. PLoS ONE 11:e0159434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Escoffre J, Portet T, Wasungu L, Teissié J, Dean D, Rols M (2009) What is (still not) known of the mechanism by which electroporation mediates gene transfer and expression in cells and tissues. Mol Biotechnol 41:286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Fahey PF, Webb WW (1978) Lateral diffusion in phospholipid bilayer membranes and multilamellar liquid crystals. Biochemistry 17(15):3046–3053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Foster K, Schwan H (1989) Dielectric properties of tissues and biological materials: a critical review. CRC Biomed Eng 17(1):25–104Google Scholar
  6. Harakawa S, Inoue N, Hori T, Tochio K, Kariya T, Takahashi K, Doge F, Suzuki H, Nagasawa H (2005) Effects of a 50 Hz electric field on plasma lipid peroxide level and antioxidant activity in rats. Bioelectromagnetics 26(7):589–594CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kotnik T, Pucihar G, Miklavčič D (2010) Induced transmembrane voltage and its correlation with electroporation-mediated molecular transport. J Membr Biol 236:3–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kotnik T, Kramar P, Pucihar G, Miklavčič D, Tarek M (2012) Cell membrane electroporation ? Part 1: the phenomenon. IEEE Electr Insul M 28:14–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Krassowska W, Filev PD (2007) Modelling electroporation in a single cell. Biophys J 92(2):404–4017CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kroeger JH, Vernon D, Grant M (2009) Curvature-driven pore growth in charged membranes during charge-pulse and voltage-clamp experiments. Biophys J 96(3):907–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Leguébe M, Silve A, Mir L, Poignard C (2014) Conducting and permeable states of cell membrane submitted to high voltage pulses. mathematical and numerical studies validated by the experiments. J Theor Biol 360:83–94CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Li J, Lin H (2011) Numerical simulation of molecular uptake via electroporation. Bioelectrochemistry 82(1):10–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Neu J, Krassowska W (1999) Asymptotic model of electroporation. Phys Rev E 53(3):3471–3482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Pakhomova O, Gregory B, Khorokhorina V, Bowman A, Xiao S, Pakhomov A (2011) Electroporation-induced electrosen-sitization. Plos One 6:e17100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Perrussel R, Poignard C (2013) Asymptotic expansion of steady-state potential in a high contrast medium with a thin resistive layer. Appl Math Comput 221:48–65MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Poignard C (2009) About the transmembrane voltage potential of a biological cell in time-harmonic regime. ESAIM Proc 26:162–179MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Poignard C, Silve A (2014) Différence de potentiel induite par un champ electrique sur la membrane d’une cellule biologique. La Rev 3EI 75:11–20Google Scholar
  18. Portet T, Dimova R (2010) A new method for measuring edge tensions and stability of lipid bilayers: effect of membrane composition. Biophys J 84:3263–3273Google Scholar
  19. Pucihar G, Mir L, Miklavčič D (2002) The effect of pulse repetition frequency on the uptake into electropermeabilized cells in vitro with possible applications in electrochemotherapy. Bioelectrochemistry 57:167–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Pucihar G, Kotnik T, Valič B, Miklavčič D (2006) Numerical determination of transmembrane voltage induced on irregularly shaped cells. Ann Biomed Eng 34(4):642–652CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rols M, Delteil C, Golzio M, Teissié J (1998) Control by ATP and ADP of voltage-induced mammalian-cell-membrane permeabilization, gene transfer and resulting expression. Eur J Biochem 254:382–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Ryham R, Berezovik I, Cohen F (2011) Aqueous viscosity is the primary source of friction in lipidic pore dynamics. Biophys J 101:2929–2938CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sandre O, Moreaux L, Brochard-Wyart F (1999) Dynamics of transient pores in stretched vesicles. Proc Natl Acad Sci 96:10591–10596CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Šatkauskas S, André F, Bureau M, Scherman D, Miklavčič D, Mir L (2005) Electrophoretic component of electric pulses determines the efficacy of in vivo DNA electrotransfer. Hum Gene Ther 16(10):1194–1201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sengel J, Wallace MI (2016) Imaging the dynamics of individual pores. PNAS 113:5281–5286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Silve A, Giumerá Brunet A, Ivorra A, Mir L (2014) Comparison of the effects of the repetition rate between microsecond and nanosecond pulses: electropermeabilisation-induced electro-desensitization? Biochim Biophys Acta Gen Subj 1840:2139–2151CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Smith K, Neu J, Krassowska W (2004) Model of creation and evolution of stable electropores for DNA delivery. Biophys J 86(5):2813–2826CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smith K, Son R, Gowrishankar T, Weaver J (2014) Emergence of a large pore subpopulation during electroporating pulses. Bioelectrochemistry 100:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Son R, Gowrishankar T, Weaver J (2016) Modeling a conventional electroporation pulse train: decreased pore number, cumulative calcium transport and an example of electrosensitization. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 63:571–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Vernier T, Sun Y, Marcu L, Salemi S, Craft C, Gundersen M (2003) Calcium bursts induced by nanosecond electric pulses. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 310(2):286–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Weaver J, Chimazdzhev Y (1996) Theory of electroporation: a review. Bioelectrochem Bioenerg 41:135–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wegner L, Frey W, Silve A (2015) Electroporation of dc–3f cells is a dual process. Biophys J 108:1660–1671CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Team MONC, INRIA Bordeaux-Sud-Ouest, Institut de Mathématiques de BordeauxCNRS UMR 5251 & Université de BordeauxBordeauxFrance
  2. 2.Karlsruhe Institute of TechnologyInstitute for Pulse Power and Microwave TechnologyEggenstein-LeopoldshafenGermany

Section editors and affiliations

  • Damijan Miklavčič
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Electrical EngineeringUniversity of LjubljanaLjubljanaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations