Mapping of proton relaxation near superparamagnetic iron oxide particle-loaded polymer threads for magnetic susceptibility difference quantificationa

Investigative Radiology

Volumn 47, Issue 6, 2012, Pages 359-367

  Donker, Hank C W ^a   Krämer, Nils A ^a   Otto, Jens ^a   Klinge, Uwe ^a   Slabu, Ioana ^b   Baumann, Martin ^b   Kuhl, Christiane K ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL RWTH AACHEN   (Germany)

^b RWTH AACHEN UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

magnetic resonance imaging; magnetic susceptibility; relaxometry; superparamagnetic iron oxide; textile mesh implant

Indexed keywords

AGAROSE; POLYMER; PROTON; SUPERPARAMAGNETIC IRON OXIDE;

ARTICLE; IN VITRO STUDY; MAGNETISM; PHANTOM; PRIORITY JOURNAL;

EID: 84861094095     PISSN: 00209996     EISSN: 15360210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/RLI.0b013e3182484fdf     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Klosterhalfen B, Junge K, Klinge U. The light-weight and large porous mesh concept for hernia repair. Expert Rev Med Devices. 2005;2:103-117.
2. Burger JWA, Luijendijk RW, Hop WCJ, et al. Long-term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of suture versus mesh repair of incisional hernia. Ann Surg. 2004;240:578-585.
3. Heniford BT, Park A, Ramshaw BJ, et al. Laparoscopic repair of ventral hernias nine years' experience with 850 consecutive hernias. Ann Surg. 2003;238: 391-400.
4. Klinge U, Klosterhalfen B, Birkenhauer V, et al. Impact of polymer pore size on the interface scar formation in a rat model. J Surg Res. 2002;103:208-214.
5. Zinther NB, Fedder J, Friis-Andersen H. Noninvasive detection and mapping of intraabdominal adhesions: a review of the current literature. Surg Endosc. 2010;24:2681-2686.
6. Mittal T, Kumar V, Khullar R, et al. Diagnosis and management of spigelian hernia: a review of literature and our experience. J Minim Access Surg. 2008; 4:95-98.
7. Fischer T, Ladurner R, Gangkofer A, et al. Functional cine MRI of the abdomen for the assessment of implanted synthetic mesh in patients after incisional hernia repair: initial results. Eur Radiol. 2007;17:3123-3129.
8. Guo J, Jiang X, Hu Y, et al. Preparation of Gd3+-containing polymer complex as a novel magnetic resonance signal-enhancing coating material. J Mater Sci Mater Med. 2003;14:283-286.
9. Unal O, Li J, Cheng W, et al. MR-visible coatings for endovascular device visualization. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2006;23:763-769.
10. Krämer NA, Donker HC, Otto J, et al. A concept for magnetic resonance visualization of surgical textile implants. Invest Radiol. 2010;45:477-483.
11. Widmaier S, Jung WI, Pfeffer K, et al. MRI and determination of T1 and T2 of solid polymers using a 1.5 T whole-body imager. Magn Reson Imaging. 1993;11:733-737.
12. Schenck JF. The role of magnetic susceptibility in magnetic resonance imaging: MRI magnetic compatibility of the first and second kinds. Med Phys. 1996. 23. 815-850
13. Gossuin Y, Gillis P, Hocq A, et al. Magnetic resonance relaxation properties of superparamagnetic particles. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. 2009;1:299-310.
14. Wang YX, Hussain SM, Krestin GP. Superparamagnetic iron oxide contrast agents: physicochemical characteristics and applications in MR imaging. Eur Radiol. 2001;11:2319-2331.
15. Jun YW, Seo JW, Cheon J. Nanoscaling laws of magnetic nanoparticles and their applicabilities in biomedical sciences. Acc Chem Res. 2008;41:179-189.
16. Hodenius MA, Niendorf T, Krombach GA, et al. Synthesis, physicochemical characterization and MR relaxometry of aqueous ferrofluids. J Nanosci Nanotechnol. 2008;8:2399-2409.
17. Gore JC, Majumdar S. Superparamagnetic iron oxide particles. Radiology. 1988;169:657-658.
18. Roch A, Muller RN. Theory of proton relaxation induced by superparamagnetic particles. J Chem Phys. 1999;110:5403-5411.
19. Roch A, Gossuin Y, Muller RN, et al. Superparamagnetic colloid suspensions: water magnetic relaxation and clustering. J Magnetism Magnetic Mat. 2005;293: 532-539.
20. Bulte JW, Brooks RA, Moskowitz BM, et al. Relaxometry and magnetometry of the MR contrast agent MION-46L. Magn Reson Med. 1999;42:379-384.
21. Josephson L, Lewis J, Jacobs P, et al. The effect of iron oxides on proton relaxivity. Magn Reson Imaging. 1988;6:647-653.
22. Lüdeke KM, Röschmann P, Tischler R. Susceptibility artefacts in NMR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 1985;3:329-343.
23. Kato H, Kuroda M, Yoshimura K, et al. Composition of MRI phantom equivalent to human tissues. Med Phys. 2005;32:3199-3208.
24. Kraft KA, Fatouros PP, Clarke GD, et al. An MRI phantom material for quantitative relaxometry. Magn Reson Med. 1987;5:555-562.
25. van den Brink JS, Watanabe Y, Kuhl CK, et al. Implications of SENSE MR in routine clinical practice. Eur J Radiol. 2003 Apr;46:3-27.
26. Vlaardingerbroek MT, Den Boer JA. Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Theory and Practice. 3rd ed. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 2004.
27. Karlsen OT, Verhagen R, Bovée WM. Parameter estimation from Riciandistributed data sets using a maximum likelihood estimator: application to T1 and perfusion measurements. Magn Reson Med. 1999;41:614-623.
28. Raya JG, Dietrich O, Horng A, et al. T2 measurement in articular cartilage: impact of the fitting method on accuracy and precision at low SNR. Magn Reson Med. 2010;63:181-193.
29. Bulte JW, Vymazal J, Brooks RA, et al. Frequency dependence of MR relaxation times. II. Iron oxides. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1993;3:641-648.
30. Majumdar S, Zoghbi S, Pope CF, et al. A quantitative study of relaxation rate enhancement produced by iron oxide particles in polyacrylamide gels and tissue. Magn Reson Med. 1989;9:185-202.
31. Howe FA. Relaxation times in paramagnetically doped agarose gels as a function of temperature and ion concentration. Magn Reson Imaging. 1988;6: 263-270.
32. Bulte JWM, de Jonge MWA, Kamman RL, et al. Dextran-magnetite particles: contrast-enhanced MRI of blood-brain barrier disruption in a rat model. Magn Reson Med. 1992;23:215-223.
33. Bartling SH, Budjan J, Aviv H, et al. First multimodal embolization particles visible on x-ray/computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol. 2011;46:178-186
34. Weis J, Budinsk] L. Simulation of the influence of magnetic field inhomogeneity and distortion correction in MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 1990;8: 483-489.
35. Yablonskiy DA. Quantitation of intrinsic magnetic susceptibility-related effects in a tissue matrix. Phantom study. Magn Reson Med. 1998;39:417-428.
36. Yablonskiy DA, Sukstanskiia AL, Ackerman JJH. Image artifacts in very low magnetic field MRI: the role of concomitant gradients. J Magn Reson. 2005; 174:279-286.
37. Posse S. Direct imaging of magnetic field gradients by group spin-echo selection. Magn Reson Med. 1992;25:12-29.
38. Glowinski A, Adam G, Bücker A, et al. A perspective on needle artifacts in MRI: an electromagnetic model for experimentally separating susceptibility effects. IEEE Trans Med Imaging. 2000;19:1248-1252.