4.7 Article

In vivo imaging of transplanted hepatocytes with a 1.5-T clinical MRI system - initial experience in mice

Journal

EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue 1, Pages 59-69

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00330-007-0750-7

Keywords

magnetic resonance imaging; cellular imaging; SPIO; experimental; liver transplantation; hepatocytes; cell therapy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The feasibility of in vitro mature mouse hepatocyte labeling with a novel iron oxide particle was assessed and the ability of 1.5-T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to track labeled mouse hepatocytes in syngenic recipient livers following intraportal cell transplantation was tested. Mouse hepatocytes were incubated with anionic iron oxide nanoparticles at various iron concentrations. Cell viability was assessed and iron oxide particle uptake quantified. Labeled hepatocytes were intraportally injected into 20 mice, while unlabeled hepatocytes were injected into two mice. Liver T2 values, spleen-to-muscle relative signal intensity (RIspleen/muscle) and liver-to-muscle relative signal intensity (RIliver/muscle)) on gradient-echo T2-weighted imaging after injection of either labeled or unlabeled hepatocytes were compared with an ANOVA test followed by Fisher's a posteriori PLSD test. Livers, spleens and lungs were collected for histological analysis. Iron oxide particle uptake was saturable with a maximum iron content of 20 pg per cell and without viability alteration after 3 days of culture. Following labeled-cell transplantation, recipient livers showed well-defined nodular foci of low signal intensity on MRI-consistent with clusters of labeled hepatocytes on pathological analysis-combined with a significant decrease in both liver T2 values and liver-to-muscle RIliver/muscle, (P=0.01) with minimal T2 values demonstrated 8 days after transplantation. Conventional MRI can demonstrate the presence of transplanted iron-labeled mature hepatocytes in mouse liver.

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