Page 26 - ITU Journal Future and evolving technologies Volume 2 (2021), Issue 3 – Internet of Bio-Nano Things for health applications
P. 26

ITU Journal on Future and Evolving Technologies, Volume 2 (2021), Issue 3




          tain the continuous operation of BNTs.  EH from multiple   introduced application has toxic, injurious, or adverse ef‑
          resources can reduce the variance at power output with   fects on  the  living  cells  and  biochemical  processes.  Se-
          the addition of alternative complementary procedures in   cond,  an  implanted  IoBNT  application  should  be  able
          a modular fashion as investigated in [161].          to operate  without  its  performance  being  degraded  by
                                                               the  co‑existing  biochemical  processes.   Performance
          3.3.3   Energy Storage                               degradation usually follows when an IoBNT application
                                                               alters  the metabolic activities, because such alternation
          Storage  of  energy  is  also  important  when  BNTs  can‑   invokes the immune response that might in turn lead to
          not  continuously  satisfy  their  power  requirements  via   the rejection of the deployed application.  Rejection can
          EH  and  WPT  techniques.   There  has  been  conside-  occur in the form of expulsion of the IoBNT application
          rable  interest  in  miniaturizing  the  energy  storage   from  the  organism,  encapsulation  of  the  BNTs  with
          technologies to make them size‑compatible with MEMS   biological cells and tissues, or in lammation or death of
          and  NEMS  devices.   Some  of  the  efforts  have  been   the surrounding tissues.  In the case of MC, performance
          devoted  to  develop  micro‑batteries,  miniaturized  ver-  degradation  may  also  happen  as  a  result  of  cross‑talk
          sions  of  conventional  thin‑ ilm  lithiumion  batteries,   caused   by   the   natural   biochemical   signaling.
          bene iting  from novel  nanomaterials  [162].  There  are   Biocompatibility  concerns  both  materials  used  in  the
          even  a  few  studies  focusing  on  nanoscale  versions  of   physical architecture of BNTs, and the networking, energy
          lithium  batteries [163, 145].  However, they suffer from   harvesting,  power transfer,  and interfacing processes of
          low  energy  density,  short  lifetimes,  and  potential   the IoBNT. In terms of materials, synthetic biology‑based
          toxicity  in  in  vivo  applications.  More promising solution   BNTs  can  be  considered  highly  biocompatible,  as  they
          is  micro‑supercapacitors  (MSCs),   which   provide   adopt  living  cells  and  cellular  components  as  the  sub‑
            icantly  higher  energy  storage  capacity,  higher   strate [24]. Likewise,  luorescent protein‑ and DNA‑based
          charge/discharge rates, and more importantly, scalability   BNTs are also of biological origins,  and thus,  can be ex‑
          and   lexibility,  which  are  crucial  for  their  integration   pected  to  offer  similar  levels  of  biocompatibility  [108].
          into BNTs [164, 165, 166].                           However, depending on their exact biological origin and
          Several types of materials have been considered for the   their  overall  amount  in  the  body,  they  may  still  trigger
          design  of  MSC  electrode  to  improve  the  energy  density.   the  immune  response.  For  example,  a  virus‑based  syn‑
          Carbon  nanomaterials,  such  as  CNTs  and  graphene,  are   thetic BNT can be labeled as foreign agent and attacked
          the most widely researched materials due to their abun‑   by  the  immune  system,  unless  it  is  designed  to  possess
          dance and stability, which is re lected to an extended life‑   a  kind  of  stealth  proteins  that  help  escape  the  immune
          time [164].  Due to its extremely high surface‑to‑volume   control [171].  For arti icial BNTs based on nanomateri‑
          ratio, high mobility and  lexibility, graphene has attracted   als,  biocompatibility  is  more  challenging.  There  is  still
          particular attention [167, 168].  Additionally, conducting   no consensus on a universal test of biocompatibility for
          polymers, such as PEDOT/PSS, and graphene/conducting   nanomaterials, leading to con licting results in the litera‑
          polymer heterostructures are also considered as  lexible   ture about almost all materials. Complexity of the biologi‑
          electrodes for MSCs [164]. The research in MSCs is still at   cal systems and reproducibility problem for in vivo and in
          early stages;  however, we believe that with the increase   vitro tests are the main causes of the ongoing ambiguity.
          of energy density and further reduction of sizes, they can   Nonetheless, many polymers (e.g., PMMA, Parylene), gold,
          be a viable candidate for energy storage units in BNTs.  titanium, and some ceramics are widely known to be bio‑
                                                               compatible [172, 173, 174]. Carbon‑based materials, e.g.,
          3.4  Biocompatibility and Co‑existence               CNT and graphene, have been reported as both biocom‑
                                                               patible and toxic in different works, preventing a gene-
          Biological processes are complex, and intertwined, often   ralization  over  these  nanomaterials.  This  is  attributed
          through  intricate  relationships  that  are  yet  to  be  unco-  to  large  variations  in  their  physicochemical  properties,
          vered.   Perturbation  of  homeostasis  maintained  by   e.g.,  size,  shape,  surface  characteristics,  adopted  in
          these relationships may result in serious disorders.  Even   different  works  [175,  176].   However,  it  has  been
          more complicated is the fact that the composition of the   repeatedly  re‑ ported that their biocompatibility can be
          physiological environment and the interactome may have   modulated  with  chemical  manipulation  [175].  For
          a large variance  among  different  members  of  the  same   example,  surface  functionalization  with  dextran  is
          species.  For  example,  gut  microbiome  is  known  to  be   shown  to  reduce  the  toxicity  of  graphene  oxide  (GO),
          composed  of  different  types  of  bacteria  in  different   hinting   at   strategies   to   make   carbon‑based
          people  [169].  Therefore,  the  evaluation  of  in  vivo   nanomaterials  suitable  for  safe  in  vivo  applications
          IoBNT  applications in terms of biocompatibility is very   [177,  176].  Similarly,  nanoparticles  are  shown  to  be
          challenging,  however,  must  be  considered  seriously.  detoxi ied  upon  the  functionalization  of  their  surfaces
          Biocompatibility  constraints  for  IoBNT  can  be  viewed   with smart/benign ligands [178].
          from two angles [170]. First, an IoBNT application, along   In  terms  of  processes,  attention  must  be  paid  to  the
          with all the communication methods and devices therein,   communication, bio‑cyber interfacing, energy harvesting,
          should not disrupt the homeostasis of the organism it is   transfer and storage processes.  In EM‑based and acous‑
          implemented in.  Such disruption might occur when the  tic communication and power transfer processes, for ex‑



          14                                © International Telecommunication Union, 2021
   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31