RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: In recent years, micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) has emerged as a high-resolution modality for vascular exploration in vivo. Several x-ray contrast agents for in vivo imaging are on the market and are based on different formulations. The objective of this study was to compare contrast-related and pharmacokinetic properties of a water-soluble compound containing iomeprol (Iomeron 400) and blood-pool agents (eXIA160XL, AuroVist 15 nm, and ExiTron nano 12000) for the identification of suitable in vivo vascular imaging applications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-four healthy C57BL/6J mice were used in this study. Iomeprol was administered with a continuous infusion protocol; the other agents as a bolus. Anatomical micro-CT was applied at the head, neck, and lower hind limb before (baseline) and immediately after contrast injection, and used to quantify contrast-related properties of the agents. Dynamic micro-CT was applied at the same regions to characterize the agents pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: All contrast media revealed safe, except for eXIA160XL, which caused death in four of eight tested animals and was therefore excluded early from the study. AuroVist 15 nm provided the highest attenuation (2.33/mm) as compared to iomeprol (1.97/mm) and ExiTron nano 12000 (1.58/mm) and a maximum temporal variation of contrast of 20% after 30 minutes, but the appearance of a dark skin staining did not allow multiple injections of the agent. Iomeprol passively diffused across capillary membranes, and after 30 minutes doubled the tissue contrast with respect to its initial levels. ExiTron nano 12000 revealed temporal variations of contrast below 10% and significantly reduced clearance rates after the third consecutive injection. CONCLUSION: AuroVist 15 nm is best suited for anatomical investigation of the vascular network, while the high extravasation levels of iomeprol can be exploited for perfusion analysis. ExiTron nano 12000 is indicated for use in longitudinal monitoring with repeated injections.
RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: In recent years, micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) has emerged as a high-resolution modality for vascular exploration in vivo. Several x-ray contrast agents for in vivo imaging are on the market and are based on different formulations. The objective of this study was to compare contrast-related and pharmacokinetic properties of a water-soluble compound containing iomeprol (Iomeron 400) and blood-pool agents (eXIA160XL, AuroVist 15 nm, and ExiTron nano 12000) for the identification of suitable in vivo vascular imaging applications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty-four healthy C57BL/6J mice were used in this study. Iomeprol was administered with a continuous infusion protocol; the other agents as a bolus. Anatomical micro-CT was applied at the head, neck, and lower hind limb before (baseline) and immediately after contrast injection, and used to quantify contrast-related properties of the agents. Dynamic micro-CT was applied at the same regions to characterize the agents pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: All contrast media revealed safe, except for eXIA160XL, which caused death in four of eight tested animals and was therefore excluded early from the study. AuroVist 15 nm provided the highest attenuation (2.33/mm) as compared to iomeprol (1.97/mm) and ExiTron nano 12000 (1.58/mm) and a maximum temporal variation of contrast of 20% after 30 minutes, but the appearance of a dark skin staining did not allow multiple injections of the agent. Iomeprol passively diffused across capillary membranes, and after 30 minutes doubled the tissue contrast with respect to its initial levels. ExiTron nano 12000 revealed temporal variations of contrast below 10% and significantly reduced clearance rates after the third consecutive injection. CONCLUSION: AuroVist 15 nm is best suited for anatomical investigation of the vascular network, while the high extravasation levels of iomeprol can be exploited for perfusion analysis. ExiTron nano 12000 is indicated for use in longitudinal monitoring with repeated injections.
Authors: Sara Rapic; Christel Vangestel; Jeroen Verhaeghe; Tim Van den Wyngaert; Rukun Hinz; Marleen Verhoye; Patrick Pauwels; Steven Staelens; Sigrid Stroobants Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2017-10 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Mohamed F Attia; Nicolas Anton; Roman Akasov; Manuela Chiper; Elena Markvicheva; Thierry F Vandamme Journal: Pharm Res Date: 2015-10-28 Impact factor: 4.200
Authors: V Lokesh Battula; Phuong M Le; Jeffrey C Sun; Khoa Nguyen; Bin Yuan; Ximin Zhou; Sonali Sonnylal; Teresa McQueen; Vivian Ruvolo; Keith A Michel; Xiaoyang Ling; Rodrigo Jacamo; Elizabeth Shpall; Zhiqiang Wang; Arvind Rao; Gheath Al-Atrash; Marina Konopleva; R Eric Davis; Melvyn A Harrington; Catherine W Cahill; Carlos Bueso-Ramos; Michael Andreeff Journal: JCI Insight Date: 2017-07-06
Authors: Steven P Grover; Colin E Evans; Ashish S Patel; Bijan Modarai; Prakash Saha; Alberto Smith Journal: Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol Date: 2015-12-17 Impact factor: 8.311
Authors: Nicholas B Sobol; Joshua A Korsen; Ali Younes; Kimberly J Edwards; Jason S Lewis Journal: Mol Imaging Biol Date: 2020-09-09 Impact factor: 3.488
Authors: Veerle Kersemans; Pavitra Kannan; John S Beech; Russell Bates; Benjamin Irving; Stuart Gilchrist; Philip D Allen; James Thompson; Paul Kinchesh; Christophe Casteleyn; Julia Schnabel; Mike Partridge; Ruth J Muschel; Sean C Smart Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Steven P Grover; Prakash Saha; Julia Jenkins; Arun Mukkavilli; Oliver T Lyons; Ashish S Patel; Kavitha Sunassee; Bijan Modarai; Alberto Smith Journal: Thromb Res Date: 2015-10-09 Impact factor: 3.944