4.7 Article

Coating thickness of magnetic iron oxide nanoparticles affects R2 relaxivity

Journal

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
Volume 26, Issue 6, Pages 1634-1641

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.21194

Keywords

superparamagnetic nanoparticle; coating thickness; relaxivity; MRI contrast agent; molecular imaging

Funding

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [UO1 HL080711-01] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIBIB NIH HHS [AF31EB005928] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIGMS NIH HHS [T32 GM008169] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To evaluate the effect of coating thickness on the relaxivity of iron oxide nanoparticles. Materials and Methods: Monocrystalline superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (MIONs), coated with a polyethylene glycol (PEG)-modified. phospholipid micelle coating. with different PEG molecular weights, were prepared. The particle diameters were measured with dynamic light scattering (DLS) and electron microscopy (EM). The R-1 and R-2 of MIONs were measured using a bench-top nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) relaxometer. pH was varied for some measurements. Monte Carlo simulations of proton movement in a field with nanometer-sized magnetic inhomogeneities were performed. Results: Increasing the molecular weight of the PEG portion of the micelle coating increased overall particle diameter. As coating thickness increases, the R-2 decreases and the R-1 increases. Changing pH has no effect on relaxivity. The Monte Carlo simulations suggest that the effect of coating size on R-2 relaxivity is determined by two competing factors: the physical exclusion of protons from the magnetic field and the residence time for protons within the coating zone. Conclusion: Coating thickness can significantly impact the R-2. and the R-2/R-1 ratio, of a MION contrast agent. An understanding of the relationship between coating properties and changes in relaxivity is critical for designing magnetic nanoparticle probes for molecular imaging applications using MRI.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available