4.5 Article

In Vivo Serial Evaluation of Superparamagnetic Iron-Oxide Labeled Stem Cells by Off-Resonance Positive Contrast

Journal

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
Volume 60, Issue 6, Pages 1269-1275

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.21816

Keywords

positive contrast; cellular MRI; embryonic stem cell

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [NHLBI 5K18HL87198-2]
  2. American Heart Association, Beginning Grant-in-Aid

Ask authors/readers for more resources

MRI is emerging as a diagnostic modality to track iron-oxide-labeled stem cells. This study investigates whether an off-resonance (OR) pulse sequence designed to generate positive contrast at 1.5T can assess the location, quantity, and viability of delivered stem cells in vivo. Using mouse embryonic stem cell transfected with luciferase reporter gene (luc-mESC), multimodality validation of OR signal was conducted to determine whether engraftment parameters of superparamagnetic iron-oxide labeled luc-mESC (SPIO-luc-mESC) could be determined after cell transplantation into the mouse hindlimb. A significant increase in signal- and contrast-to-noise of the SPIO-luc-mESC was achieved with the OR technique when compared to a gradient recalled echo (GRE) sequence. A significant correlation between the quantity of SPIO-luc-mESC and OR signal was observed immediately after transplantation (R-2 = 0.74, P < 0.05). The assessment of transplanted cell viability by bioluminescence imaging (BLI) showed a significant increase of luciferase activities by day 16, while the MRI signal showed no difference. No significant correlation between BLI and MRI signals of cell viability was observed. In conclusion, using an OR sequence the precise localization and quantitation of SPIO-labeled stem cells in both space and time were possible. However, the OR sequence did not allow evaluation of cell viability. Magn Reson Med 60:1269-1275,2008. (C) 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available