| Literature DB >> 28820442 |
Debora Bonvin1, Duncan T L Alexander2, Angel Millán3, Rafael Piñol4, Beatriz Sanz5, Gerardo F Goya6, Abelardo Martínez7, Jessica A M Bastiaansen8,9, Matthias Stuber10,11, Kurt J Schenk12, Heinrich Hofmann13, Marijana Mionić Ebersold14,15,16.
Abstract
Aqueous synthesis without ligands of iron oxide nanoparticles (IONPs) with exceptional properties still remains an open issue, because of the challenge to control simultaneously numerous properties of the IONPs in these rigorous settings. To solve this, it is necessary to correlate the synthesis process with their properties, but this correlation is until now not well understood. Here, we study and correlate the structure, crystallinity, morphology, as well as magnetic, relaxometric and heating properties of IONPs obtained for different durations of the hydrothermal treatment that correspond to the different growth stages of IONPs upon initial co-precipitation in aqueous environment without ligands. We find that their properties were different for IONPs with comparable diameters. Specifically, by controlling the growth of IONPs from primary to secondary particles firstly by colloidal and then also by magnetic interactions, we control their crystallinity from monocrystalline to polycrystalline IONPs, respectively. Surface energy minimization in the aqueous environment along with low temperature treatment is used to favor nearly defect-free IONPs featuring superior properties, such as high saturation magnetization, magnetic volume, surface crystallinity, the transversal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) relaxivity (up to r₂ = 1189 mM-1·s-1 and r₂/r₁ = 195) and specific absorption rate, SAR (up to 1225.1 W·gFe-1).Entities:
Keywords: MRI relaxivity; aqueous synthesis; hydrothermal treatment; iron oxide nanoparticles; magnetic nanoparticle; saturation magnetization; specific absorption rate
Year: 2017 PMID: 28820442 PMCID: PMC5575707 DOI: 10.3390/nano7080225
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Figure 1(a) Representative TEM micrographs of IONP samples. The scale bars on the micrographs are 50 nm. The red arrow on the top indicates the direction of the increase of the duration of the HT treatment. (b) Lattice parameter, and (c) saturation magnetization measured at 300 K for IONPs compared with corresponding values of stoichiometric maghemite (γ-Fe2O3) and magnetite (Fe3O4) used as reference and marked by red lines.
Equivalent particle size or TEM diameter (dT), hydrodynamic diameter (dH) in water from number-weighted distribution, crystalline diameter (dC) (the average (dCa) and obtained from the narrowest line (404) (dC404)), lattice parameter (a), ζ-potential at pH 4 and specific surface area (SSA) (measured by BET) of IONPs. Data are given as mean ± standard deviation. Standard deviation for dC and SSA is ~10%.
| Sample Name | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 8.0 ± 1.9 | 16.1 ± 4.5 | 7.6 | 8.2 | 55.6 ± 0.4 | 8.342(9) | 170.33 |
| 2 | 14.7 ± 5.0 | 26.9 ± 8.5 | 14.6 | 16.6 | 47.4 ± 2.2 | 8.3468(29) | 91.92 |
| 3 | 15.6 ± 4.7 | 29.5 ± 8.5 | 15.9 | 18.0 | 47.9 ± 2.3 | 8.3505(26) | 91.92 |
| 4 | 19.0 ± 5.7 | 25.8 ± 7.8 | 15.1 | 16.8 | 46.3 ± 1.4 | 8.3504(25) | 80.74 |
| 5 | 17.4 ± 4.7 | 35.1 ± 10.6 | 19.5 | 21.8 | 49.3 ± 2.4 | 8.3395(43) | 77.53 |
| 6 | 21.5 ± 6.3 | 30.2 ± 9.1 | 20.3 | 22.4 | 48.2 ± 0.6 | 8.3519(19) | 83.13 |
Figure 2Aberration-corrected TEM micrographs of nearly defect-free highly crystalline surface of IONPs’ samples 4 (a,b) and 6 (c,d). All scale bars are 10 nm.
Figure 3TEM micrographs and the corresponding scheme of growth from spherical primary particles (PPs) in sample 1 (a) by coalescence of PPs into secondary particles (SPs) in sample 2 (b) and their further recrystallization in sample 3 until rectangular and cubic shapes in sample 4 (c). All scale bars are 5 nm.
Figure 4Representative TEM micrographs of monocrystalline secondary particles, SPs, (a) and polycrystalline SPs (b,c) separated by grey horizontal dashed line. The corresponding interaction (colloidal and magnetic interactions) and the type of SPs (monocrystalline and polycrystalline) caused by this interaction are indicated by the arrows. All scale bars are 10 nm.
Figure 5(a) MRI transverse relaxivity (r2) as a function of square of corresponding saturation magnetization (Ms) shows increase except for the samples 5 and 6 (marked red); (b) r2 in blue and (Ms)2 in red, given versus samples of IONPs along with the increased duration of the HT treatment. Insert shows the relaxivity ratio (r2/r1) versus samples.
Figure 6(a) SAR values as a function of frequency at the field amplitude of 23.9 kA·m−1 measured for all 6 samples. (b) SAR values as a function of the f·H product for measured values of f and H. The vertical dashed lines indicate two biological limits for the f·H product depending of the exposed volume, which corresponds to indicated hyperthermia coil size.
Figure 7SAR as a function of the sample’s number to observe the evolution of SAR with the prolonged HT duration of IONPs at the field parameters the closest to the clinical limit of the f·H product. The insert shows SAR as a function of dT at the same field parameters. The error bars indicate standard deviation.