4.8 Article

Generation of superparamagnetic liposomes revealed as highly efficient MRI contrast agents for in vivo imaging

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 127, 期 30, 页码 10676-10685

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja0516460

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Maghemite (gamma-Fe2O3) nanocrystals stable at neutral pH and in isotonic aqueous media were synthesized and encapsulated within large unilamellar vesicles of egg phosphatidylcholine (EPC) and distearoyl-SN-glycero-3-phosphoethanolamine-N-[methoxy(poly(ethylene glycol))-2000] (DSPE-PEG(2000), 5 mol %), formed by film hydration coupled with sequential extrusion. The nonentrapped particles were removed by flash gel exclusion chromatography. The magnetic-fluid-loaded liposomes (MFLs) were homogeneous in size (195 +/- 33 hydrodynamic diameters from quasi-elastic light scattering). Iron loading was varied from 35 up to 167 Fe(III)/lipid mol %. Physical and superparamagnetic characteristics of the iron oxide particles were preserved after liposome encapsulation as shown by cryogenic transmission electron microscopy and magnetization curve recording. In biological media, MFLs were highly stable and avoided ferrofluid flocculation while being nontoxic toward the J774 macrophage cell line. Moreover, steric stabilization ensured by PEG-surface-grafting significantly reduced liposome association with the macrophages. The ratios of the transversal (r(2)) and longitudinal (r(1)) magnetic resonance (MR) relaxivities of water protons in MFL dispersions (6 < r(2)/r(1) < 18) ranked them among the best T-2 contrast agents, the higher iron loading the better the T-2 contrast enhancement. Magnetophoresis demonstrated the possible guidance of MFLs by applying a magnetic field gradient. Mouse MR imaging assessed MFLs efficiency as contrast agents in vivo: MR angiography performed 24 h after intravenous injection of the contrast agent provided the first direct evidence of the stealthiness of PEG-ylated magnetic-fluid-loaded liposomes.

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

4.8
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