This seems like a big breakthrough, not just for people without spleens, but for iatrogenic disease in hospitals:
To test the device, Ingber and his team infected rats with either E. coli or Staphylococcus aureus and filtered blood from some of the animals through the biospleen. Five hours after infection, 89% of the rats whose blood had been filtered were still alive, compared with only 14% of those that were infected but not treated. The researchers found that the device had removed more than 90% of the bacteria from the rats’ blood. The rats whose blood had been filtered also had less inflammation in their lungs and other organs, suggesting they would be less prone to sepsis.
The researchers then tested whether the biospleen could handle the volume of blood in an average adult human — about 5 litres. They ran human blood containing a mixture of bacteria and fungi through the biospleen at a rate of 1 litre per hour, and found that the device removed most of the pathogens within five hours.
That degree of efficacy is probably enough to control an infection, Ingber says. Once the biospleen has removed most pathogens from the blood, antibiotics and the immune system can fight off remaining traces of infection — such as pathogens lodged in the organs, he says.To test the device, Ingber and his team infected rats with either E. coli or Staphylococcus aureus and filtered blood from some of the animals through the biospleen. Five hours after infection, 89% of the rats whose blood had been filtered were still alive, compared with only 14% of those that were infected but not treated. The researchers found that the device had removed more than 90% of the bacteria from the rats’ blood. The rats whose blood had been filtered also had less inflammation in their lungs and other organs, suggesting they would be less prone to sepsis.
The researchers then tested whether the biospleen could handle the volume of blood in an average adult human — about 5 litres. They ran human blood containing a mixture of bacteria and fungi through the biospleen at a rate of 1 litre per hour, and found that the device removed most of the pathogens within five hours.
That degree of efficacy is probably enough to control an infection, Ingber says. Once the biospleen has removed most pathogens from the blood, antibiotics and the immune system can fight off remaining traces of infection — such as pathogens lodged in the organs, he says.
Note that it could also be effective against ebola.
On another front, eliminating bad proteins using RNA interference.
Faster, please.
Expect to see a press release soon about encouraging results in growing hearts from stem cells. As in an entire organ was grown for a cow, placed in the cow, and it worked. Human trials expected in a few years. The lab involved has a solution to the problem of getting blood into the organ. The same research lab also has an artificial heart that uses electric pumps, not pneumatic, and is small enough to be implanted in people. Also in trials in a cow.
I liked the RNAi article, although I don’t see it helping with cancers (IANAD or medical professional) because I am skeptical there are applicable target proteins across multiple patients. (Now if in the future this treatment can be customized to individual patients I’ll take back my skepticism.) This could possibly help with a broad range of not only genetic defects but (chronic?) viral infections as well. The article mentions that a therapy for Hepatitis B was in development.
I would hope this technology would help with HIV, but I fear that HIV’s mutation rate would deprive RNAi of a stable protein target.