4.5 Article

Detection threshold of single SPIO-Labeled cells with FIESTA

Journal

MAGNETIC RESONANCE IN MEDICINE
Volume 53, Issue 2, Pages 312-320

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/mrm.20356

Keywords

magnetic resonance imaging; iron-oxide; single cell; detection threshold; cell tracking

Ask authors/readers for more resources

MRI of superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO)-labeled cells has become a valuable tool for studying the in vivo trafficking of transplanted cells. Cellular detection with MRI is generally considered to be orders of magnitude less sensitive than other techniques, such as positron emission tomography (PET), single photon emission-computed tomography (SPECT), or optical fluorescence microscopy. However, an analytic description of the detection threshold for single SPIO-labeled cells and the parameters that govern detection has not been adequately provided. In the present work, the detection threshold for single SPIO-labeled cells and the effect of resolution and SNR were studied for a balanced steady-state free precession (SSFP) sequence (3D-FIESTA). Based on the results from both theoretical and experimental analyses, an expression that predicts the minimum detectable mass of SPIO (m.) required to detect a single cell against a uniform signal background was derived: m(c) = 5v/(K-fsl (.) SNR), where v is the voxel volume, SNR is the image signal-to-noise ratio, and K-fsl is an empirical constant measured to be 6.2 +/- 0.5 x 10(-5) mu/pgFe. Using this expression, it was shown that the sensitivity of MRI is not very different from that of PET, requiring femtomole quantities of SPIO iron for detection under typical micro-imaging conditions (100 mum isotropic resolution, SNR = 60). The results of this work will aid in the design of cellular imaging experiments by defining the lower limit of SPIO labeling required for single cell detection at any given resolution and SNR. (C) 2005 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