Fluorescent bacterial magnetic nanoparticles as bimodal contrast agents

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 42, Issue 4, 2007, Pages 235-241

  Lisy, Marcus René ^a   Hartung, Annegret ^a   Lang, Claus ^b   Schüler, Dirk ^b   Richter, Walter ^c   Reichenbach, Jürgen R ^a   Kaiser, Werner A ^a   Hilger, Ingrid ^a  

^a FRIEDRICH SCHILLER UNIVERSITY JENA   (Germany)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MUNICH   (Germany)

^c JENA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Germany)

Author keywords

Bacterial nanoparticles; Bimodal contrast agents; Magnetic resonance imaging; Molecular imaging; Optical imaging

Indexed keywords

CONTRAST MEDIUM; FLUORESCENT DYE; NANOPARTICLE;

ANIMAL CELL; ANIMAL CELL CULTURE; ARTICLE; BACTERIUM; CELLULAR DISTRIBUTION; CONFOCAL LASER MICROSCOPY; COVALENT BOND; FLUORESCENCE; FLUORESCENCE ACTIVATED CELL SORTING; FLUORESCENCE ANALYSIS; IMAGING SYSTEM; MAGNETISM; MAGNETOSOME; MAGNETOSPIRILLUM GRYPHISWALDENSE; MOUSE; NEAR INFRARED SPECTROSCOPY; NONHUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARTICLE SIZE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPY;

EID: 33947155850     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/01.rli.0000255832.44443.e7     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Weissleder R, Mahmood U. Molecular imaging. Radiology. 2001;219:316-333.
2. Reimer P, Balzer T. Ferucarbotran (Resovist): a new clinically approved RES-specific contrast agent for contrast-enhanced MRI of the liver: properties, clinical development, and applications. Eur Radiol. 2003;13:1266-1276.
3. Arbab AS, Yocum GT, Wilson LB, et al. Comparison of transfection agents in forming complexes with ferumoxides, cell labeling efficiency, and cellular viability. Mol Imaging. 2004;3:24-32.
4. Matuszewski L, Persigehl T, Wall A, et al. Cell tagging with clinically approved iron oxides: feasibility and effect of lipofection, particle size, and surface coating on labeling efficiency. Radiology. 2005;235:155-161.
5. Giesel FL, Stroick M, Griebe M, et al. Gadofluorine M uptake in stem cells as a new magnetic resonance imaging tracking method: an in vitro and in vivo study. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:868-873.
6. Anderson SA, Lee KK, Frank JA. Gadolinium-fullerenol as a paramagnetic contrast agent for cellular imaging. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:332-338.
7. Massoud TF, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging in living subjects: seeing fundamental biological processes in a new light. Genes Dev. 2003;17:545-580.
8. Hilger I, Leistner Y, Berndt A, et al. Near-infrared fluorescence imaging of HER-2 protein over-expression in tumour cells. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:1124-1129.
9. Schellenberger EA, Bogdanov A Jr, Hogemann D, et al. Annexin V-CLIO: a nanoparticle for detecting apoptosis by MRI. Mol Imaging. 2002;1:102-107.
10. Kircher MF, Mahmood U, King RS, et al. A multimodal nanoparticle for preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and intraoperative optical brain tumor delineation. Cancer Res. 2003;63:8122-8125.
11. Mulder WJ, Koole R, Brandwijk RJ, et al. Quantum dots with a paramagnetic coating as a bimodal molecular imaging probe. Nano Lett. 2006;6:1-6.
12. Scheffel A, Gruska M, Faivre D, et al. An acidic protein aligns magnetosomes along a filamentous structure in magnetotactic bacteria. Nature. 2006;440:110-114.
13. Herborn CU, Papanikolaou N, Reszka R, et al. Magnetosomes as biological model for iron binding: relaxivity determination with MRI. Rofo. 2003;175:830-834.
14. Bremer C, Ntziachristos V, Mahmood U, et al. Progress in optical imaging. Radiologe. 2001;41:131-137.
15. Metz S, Bonaterra G, Rudelius M, et al. Capacity of human monocytes to phagocytose approved iron oxide MR contrast agents in vitro. Eur Radiol. 2004;14:1851-1858.
16. Heyen U, Schuler D. Growth and magnetosome formation by microaerophilic Magnetospirillum strains in an oxygen-controlled fermentor. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol. 2003;61:536-544.
17. Grunberg K, Muller EC, Otto A, et al. Biochemical and proteomic analysis of the magnetosome membrane in Magnetospirillum gryphiswaldense. Appl Environ Microbiol. 2004;70:1040-1050.
18. Billotey C, Wilhelm C, Devaud M, et al. Cell internalization of anionic maghemite nanoparticles: quantitative effect on magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Med. 2003;49:646-654.
19. Coleman RE, Blinder RA, Jaszczak RJ. Single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT). Part II: clinical applications. Invest Radiol. 1986;21:1-11.
20. Hildebrandt IJ, Gambhir SS. Molecular imaging applications for immunology. Clin Immunol. 2004;111:210-224.
21. Townsend DW, Carney JP, Yap JT, et al. PET/CT today and tomorrow. J Nucl Med. 2004;45:4S-14S.
22. Marsden PK, Strul D, Keevil SF, et al. Simultaneous PET and NMR. Br J Radiol. 2002;75:53-59.
23. Willkomm P, Bender H, Bangard M, et al. FDG PET and immunoscintigraphy with 99mTc-labeled antibody fragments for detection of the recurrence of colorectal carcinoma. J Nucl Med. 2000;41:1657-1663.
24. Bar-Shalom R, Valdivia AY, Blaufox MD. PET imaging in oncology. Semin Nucl Med. 2000;30:150-185.
25. Ntziachristos V, Ripoll J, Wang LV, et al. Looking and listening to light: the evolution of whole-body photonic imaging. Nat Biotechnol. 2005;23:313-320.
26. Picano E. Economic and biological costs of cardiac imaging. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2005;3:13.
27. Gupta AK, Gupta M. Synthesis and surface engineering of iron oxide nanoparticles for biomedical applications. Biomaterials. 2005;26:3995-4021.
28. Lee CS Lee H, Westervelt RM. Microelectromagnets for the control of magnetic nanoparticles. Appl Phys Lett. 2001;79:3308-3310.
29. Briley-Saebo KC, Johansson LO, Hustvedt SO, et al. Clearance of iron oxide particles in rat liver: effect of hydrated particle size and coating material on liver metabolism. Invest Radiol. 2006;41:560-571.