4.7 Article

19F magnetic resonance imaging for stem/progenitor cell tracking with multiple unique perfluorocarbon nanobeacons

期刊

FASEB JOURNAL
卷 21, 期 8, 页码 1647-1654

出版社

FEDERATION AMER SOC EXP BIOL
DOI: 10.1096/fj.06-6505com

关键词

endothelial progenitor cells; nanoparticles; contrast agent

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CO-37007, U54-CA-119342] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL-078631, HL-073646] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK053041-08, R01 DK061848, R01 DK053041, R01 DK061848-06A1] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

MRI has been employed to elucidate the migratory behavior of stem/progenitor cells noninvasively in vivo with traditional proton (H-1) imaging of iron oxide nanoparticle- labeled cells. Alternatively, we demonstrate that fluorine (F-19) MRI of cells labeled with different types of liquid perfluorocarbon ( PFC) nanoparticles produces unique and sensitive cell markers distinct from any tissue background signal. To define the utility for cell tracking, mononuclear cells harvested from human umbilical cord blood were grown under proendothelial conditions and labeled with nanoparticles composed of two distinct PFC cores ( perfluorooctylbromide and perfluoro-15-crown-5 ether). The sensitivity for detecting and imaging labeled cells was defined on 11.7T ( research) and 1.5T ( clinical) scanners. Stem/progenitor cells (CD34(+) CD133(+) CD31(+)) readily internalized PFC nanoparticles without aid of adjunctive labeling techniques, and cells remained functional in vivo. PFC-labeled cells exhibited distinct F-19 signals and were readily detected after both local and intravenous injection. PFC nanoparticles provide an unequivocal and unique signature for stem/progenitor cells, enable spatial cell localization with F-19 MRI, and permit quantification and detection of multiple fluorine signatures via F-19 MR spectroscopy. This method should facilitate longitudinal investigation of cellular events in vivo for multiple cell types simultaneously.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据