Literature DB >> 17709823

Molecular imaging: integration of molecular imaging into the musculoskeletal imaging practice.

Sandip Biswal1, Donald L Resnick, John M Hoffman, Sanjiv S Gambhir.   

Abstract

Chronic musculoskeletal diseases such as arthritis, malignancy, and chronic injury and/or inflammation, all of which may produce chronic musculoskeletal pain, often pose challenges for current clinical imaging methods. The ability to distinguish an acute flare from chronic changes in rheumatoid arthritis, to survey early articular cartilage breakdown, to distinguish sarcomatous recurrence from posttherapeutic inflammation, and to directly identify generators of chronic pain are a few examples of current diagnostic limitations. There is hope that a growing field known as molecular imaging will provide solutions to these diagnostic puzzles. These techniques aim to depict, noninvasively, specific abnormal cellular, molecular, and physiologic events associated with these and other diseases. For example, the presence and mobilization of specific cell populations can be monitored with molecular imaging. Cellular metabolism, stress, and apoptosis can also be followed. Furthermore, disease-specific molecules can be targeted, and particular gene-related events can be assayed in living subjects. Relatively recent molecular and cellular imaging protocols confirm important advances in imaging technology, engineering, chemistry, molecular biology, and genetics that have coalesced into a multidisciplinary and multimodality effort. Molecular probes are currently being developed not only for radionuclide-based techniques but also for magnetic resonance (MR) imaging, MR spectroscopy, ultrasonography, and the emerging field of optical imaging. Furthermore, molecular imaging is facilitating the development of molecular therapies and gene therapy, because molecular imaging makes it possible to noninvasively track and monitor targeted molecular therapies. Implementation of molecular imaging procedures will be essential to a clinical imaging practice. With this in mind, the goal of the following discussion is to promote a better understanding of how such procedures may help address specific musculoskeletal issues, both now and in the years ahead. Copyright (c) RSNA, 2007.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17709823     DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2443060295

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  14 in total

Review 1.  Molecular body imaging: MR imaging, CT, and US. part I. principles.

Authors:  Moritz F Kircher; Jürgen K Willmann
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  In vivo magnetic resonance imaging and optical imaging comparison of viable and nonviable mesenchymal stem cells with a bifunctional label.

Authors:  Elizabeth Jane Sutton; Tobias D Henning; Sophie Boddington; Stavros Demos; Christian Krug; Reinhardt Meier; John Kornak; Shoujun Zhao; Rick Baehner; Sheida Sharifi; Heike Daldrup-Link
Journal:  Mol Imaging       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 4.488

3.  Feasibility and preliminary results of SPECT/CT arthrography of the wrist in comparison with MR arthrography in patients with suspected ulnocarpal impaction.

Authors:  Klaus Strobel; Isabelle Steurer-Dober; Angela J Da Silva; Martin W Huellner; Maria del Sol Pérez Lago; Elvira Bodmer; Urs von Wartburg; Patrick Veit-Haibach; Katharina Tornquist; Urs Hug
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2013-11-01       Impact factor: 9.236

4.  Early detection of bony alterations in rheumatoid and erosive arthritis of finger joints with high-resolution single photon emission computed tomography, and differentiation between them.

Authors:  B Ostendorf; K Mattes-György; D C Reichelt; D Blondin; A Wirrwar; R Lanzman; H W Müller; M Schneider; U Mödder; A Scherer
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 2.199

5.  18F-FDG PET of the hands with a dedicated high-resolution PEM system (arthro-PET): correlation with PET/CT, radiography and clinical parameters.

Authors:  Joyce C Mhlanga; John A Carrino; Martin Lodge; Hao Wang; Richard L Wahl
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-08-19       Impact factor: 9.236

6.  Molecular imaging of expression of vascular endothelial growth factor a (VEGF a) in femoral bone grafts transplanted into living mice.

Authors:  Olga Strachna; Daniel Torrecilla; Marie K Reumann; Inna Serganova; Jihye Kim; Simone Gieschler; Adele L Boskey; Ronald G Blasberg; Philipp Mayer-Kuckuk
Journal:  Cell Transplant       Date:  2013-04-12       Impact factor: 4.064

7.  An optical imaging method to monitor stem cell migration in a model of immune-mediated arthritis.

Authors:  Elizabeth J Sutton; Sophie E Boddington; Alexander J Nedopil; Tobias D Henning; Stavros G Demos; Rick Baehner; Barbara Sennino; Ying Lu; Heike E Daldrup-Link
Journal:  Opt Express       Date:  2009-12-21       Impact factor: 3.894

8.  Transport of anti-IL-6 antigen binding fragments into cartilage and the effects of injury.

Authors:  Sangwon Byun; Yunna L Sinskey; Yihong C S Lu; Tatiana Ort; Karl Kavalkovich; Pitchumani Sivakumar; Ernst B Hunziker; Eliot H Frank; Alan J Grodzinsky
Journal:  Arch Biochem Biophys       Date:  2013-01-18       Impact factor: 4.013

Review 9.  Musculoskeletal molecular imaging: a comprehensive overview.

Authors:  Marie K Reumann; Mitchell C Weiser; Philipp Mayer-Kuckuk
Journal:  Trends Biotechnol       Date:  2010-01-04       Impact factor: 19.536

10.  Advancing radiology through informed leadership: summary of the proceedings of the Seventh Biannual Symposium of the International Society for Strategic Studies in Radiology (IS(3)R), 23-25 August 2007.

Authors:  Ada Muellner; Gary M Glazer; Maximilian F Reiser; William G Bradley; Gabriel P Krestin; Hedvig Hricak; James H Thrall
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 5.315

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.