Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Biophysical Journal logoLink to Biophysical Journal
. 1998 Aug;75(2):721–733. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(98)77562-9

A theoretical model study of the influence of fluid stresses on a cell adhering to a microchannel wall.

D P Gaver 3rd 1, S M Kute 1
PMCID: PMC1299747  PMID: 9675174

Abstract

We predict the amplification of mechanical stress, force, and torque on an adherent cell due to flow within a narrow microchannel. We model this system as a semicircular bulge on a microchannel wall, with pressure-driven flow. This two-dimensional model is solved computationally by the boundary element method. Algebraic expressions are developed by using forms suggested by lubrication theory that can be used simply and accurately to predict the fluid stress, force, and torque based upon the fluid viscosity, muoffhannel height, H, cell size, R, and flow rate per unit width, Q2-d. This study shows that even for the smallest cells (gamma = R/H << 1), the stress, force, and torque can be significantly greater than that predicted based on flow in a cell-free system. Increased flow resistance and fluid stress amplification occur with bigger cells (gamma > 0.25), because of constraints by the channel wall. In these cases we find that the shear stress amplification is proportional to Q2-d(1-gamma)-2, and the force and torque are proportional to Q2-d(1-gamma2)-5/2. Finally, we predict the fluid mechanical influence on three-dimensional immersed objects. These algebraic expressions have an accuracy of approximately 10% for flow in channels and thus are useful for the analysis of cells in flow chambers. For cell adhesion in tubes, the approximations are accurate to approximately 25% when gamma > 0.5. These calculations may thus be used to simply predict fluid mechanical interactions with cells in these constrained settings. Furthermore, the modeling approach may be useful in understanding more complex systems that include cell deformability and cell-cell interactions.

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (164.2 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Barbee K. A., Mundel T., Lal R., Davies P. F. Subcellular distribution of shear stress at the surface of flow-aligned and nonaligned endothelial monolayers. Am J Physiol. 1995 Apr;268(4 Pt 2):H1765–H1772. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.1995.268.4.H1765. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Berg H. C., Turner L. Chemotaxis of bacteria in glass capillary arrays. Escherichia coli, motility, microchannel plate, and light scattering. Biophys J. 1990 Oct;58(4):919–930. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(90)82436-X. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chapman G. B., Cokelet G. R. Model studies of leukocyte-endothelium-blood interactions. II. Hemodynamic impact of leukocytes adherent to the wall of post-capillary vessels. Biorheology. 1997 Jan-Feb;34(1):37–56. doi: 10.1016/S0006-355X(97)00003-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Chapman G., Cokelet G. Model studies of leukocyte-endothelium-blood interactions. I. The fluid flow drag force on the adherent leukocyte. Biorheology. 1996 Mar-Apr;33(2):119–138. doi: 10.1016/0006-355X(96)00011-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Davies P. F. Flow-mediated endothelial mechanotransduction. Physiol Rev. 1995 Jul;75(3):519–560. doi: 10.1152/physrev.1995.75.3.519. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Dillon R., Fauci L., Gaver D., 3rd A microscale model of bacterial swimming, chemotaxis and substrate transport. J Theor Biol. 1995 Dec 21;177(4):325–340. doi: 10.1006/jtbi.1995.0251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Goetz D. J., el-Sabban M. E., Pauli B. U., Hammer D. A. Dynamics of neutrophil rolling over stimulated endothelium in vitro. Biophys J. 1994 Jun;66(6):2202–2209. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(94)81016-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Hammer D. A., Apte S. M. Simulation of cell rolling and adhesion on surfaces in shear flow: general results and analysis of selectin-mediated neutrophil adhesion. Biophys J. 1992 Jul;63(1):35–57. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(92)81577-1. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Harkes G., Dankert J., Feijen J. Bacterial migration along solid surfaces. Appl Environ Microbiol. 1992 May;58(5):1500–1505. doi: 10.1128/aem.58.5.1500-1505.1992. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Horsfield K., Gordon W. I. Morphometry of pulmonary veins in man. Lung. 1981;159(4):211–218. doi: 10.1007/BF02713917. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Ingber D. E. Tensegrity: the architectural basis of cellular mechanotransduction. Annu Rev Physiol. 1997;59:575–599. doi: 10.1146/annurev.physiol.59.1.575. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Konstantopoulos K., McIntire L. V. Effects of fluid dynamic forces on vascular cell adhesion. J Clin Invest. 1996 Dec 15;98(12):2661–2665. doi: 10.1172/JCI119088. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Schmid-Schoenbein G. W., Fung Y. C., Zweifach B. W. Vascular endothelium-leukocyte interaction; sticking shear force in venules. Circ Res. 1975 Jan;36(1):173–184. doi: 10.1161/01.res.36.1.173. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Tempelman L. A., Hammer D. A. Receptor-mediated binding of IgE-sensitized rat basophilic leukemia cells to antigen-coated substrates under hydrodynamic flow. Biophys J. 1994 Apr;66(4):1231–1243. doi: 10.1016/S0006-3495(94)80907-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Biophysical Journal are provided here courtesy of The Biophysical Society

RESOURCES