J R Eisenbrey1, F Forsberg. 1. Department of Radiology, Thomas Jefferson University, 132 South 10th St, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Molecular imaging of angiogenesis using contrast-enhanced ultrasound allows for functional, real-time, inexpensive imaging of angiogenesis. The addition of stabilized microbubbles as contrast agents greatly improves ultrasound signal to noise ratio/signal strength/image quality (up to 25 dB) and allows for imaging of angiogenic vasculature. METHODS: In this article recent advances in the usage of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for molecular imaging of angiogenesis are reviewed. RESULTS: The usage of commercially available agents and correlations between their imaging parameters and molecular markers of angiogenesis are reviewed. Recent developments in ultrasound contrast agents targeted to angiogenic markers for both diagnosis and monitoring are discussed. Finally, a brief overview of the emerging field of chemotherapeutic-loaded agents, which can be used with ultrasound-triggered drug delivery, is provided.
INTRODUCTION: Molecular imaging of angiogenesis using contrast-enhanced ultrasound allows for functional, real-time, inexpensive imaging of angiogenesis. The addition of stabilized microbubbles as contrast agents greatly improves ultrasound signal to noise ratio/signal strength/image quality (up to 25 dB) and allows for imaging of angiogenic vasculature. METHODS: In this article recent advances in the usage of contrast-enhanced ultrasound for molecular imaging of angiogenesis are reviewed. RESULTS: The usage of commercially available agents and correlations between their imaging parameters and molecular markers of angiogenesis are reviewed. Recent developments in ultrasound contrast agents targeted to angiogenic markers for both diagnosis and monitoring are discussed. Finally, a brief overview of the emerging field of chemotherapeutic-loaded agents, which can be used with ultrasound-triggered drug delivery, is provided.
Authors: Flemming Forsberg; Babita Kuruvilla; Mark B Pascua; Manisha H Chaudhari; Daniel A Merton; Juan P Palazzo; Barry B Goldberg Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2008-04-24 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Flemming Forsberg; Adam P Dicker; Mattew L Thakur; Nandkumar M Rawool; Ji-Bin Liu; William T Shi; Levon N Nazarian Journal: Ultrasound Med Biol Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 2.998
Authors: Gregory E R Weller; Michael K K Wong; Ruth A Modzelewski; Erxiong Lu; Alexander L Klibanov; William R Wagner; Flordeliza S Villanueva Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-01-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Kenneth J Niermann; Arthur C Fleischer; Jessica Huamani; Thomas E Yankeelov; Dong W Kim; Wendy D Wilson; Dennis E Hallahan Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2007-06 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Ursula Nemec; Stefan F Nemec; Clemens Novotny; Michael Weber; Christian Czerny; Christian R Krestan Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2012-02-10 Impact factor: 5.315
Authors: John R Eisenbrey; Christian C Wilson; Raymond J Ro; Traci B Fox; Ji-Bin Liu; See-Ying Chiou; Flemming Forsberg Journal: Ultrasonics Date: 2013-04-12 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Manasi Dahibawkar; Mark A Forsberg; Aditi Gupta; Samantha Jaffe; Kelly Dulin; John R Eisenbrey; Valgerdur G Halldorsdottir; Anya I Forsberg; Jaydev K Dave; Andrew Marshall; Priscilla Machado; Traci B Fox; Ji-Bin Liu; Flemming Forsberg Journal: Ultrasonics Date: 2015-05-05 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Lauren J Delaney; Lorela Ciraku; Brian E Oeffinger; Corinne E Wessner; Ji-Bin Liu; Jingzhi Li; Kibo Nam; Flemming Forsberg; Dennis B Leeper; Patrick O'Kane; Margaret A Wheatley; Mauricio J Reginato; John R Eisenbrey Journal: J Ultrasound Med Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 2.153
Authors: Anush Sridharan; John R Eisenbrey; Maria Stanczak; Priscilla Machado; Daniel A Merton; Annina Wilkes; Alexander Sevrukov; Haydee Ojeda-Fournier; Robert F Mattrey; Kirk Wallace; Flemming Forsberg Journal: Acad Radiol Date: 2019-12-16 Impact factor: 3.173