Literature DB >> 30913884

Effect of Bubble Concentration on the in Vitro and in Vivo Performance of Highly Stable Lipid Shell-Stabilized Micro- and Nanoscale Ultrasound Contrast Agents.

Eric C Abenojar1, Pinunta Nittayacharn2, Al Christopher de Leon1, Reshani Perera1, Yu Wang1, Ilya Bederman3, Agata A Exner1,2.   

Abstract

Ultrasound (US) is a widely used diagnostic imaging tool because it is inexpensive, safe, portable, and broadly accessible. Ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) are employed to enhance backscatter echo and improve imaging contrast. The most frequently utilized UCAs are echogenic bubbles made with a phospholipid or protein-stabilized hydrophobic gas core. While clinically utilized, applications of UCAs are often limited by rapid signal decay (<5 min) in vivo under typical ultrasound imaging protocols. Here, we report on a formulation of lipid shell-stabilized perfluoropropane (C3F8) microbubbles and nanobubbles with a significantly prolonged in vivo stability. Microbubbles (875 ± 280 nm) of the target size were prepared by utilizing a multiple-step centrifugation cycle, while nanobubbles (299 ± 189 nm) were isolated from the activated vial using a single centrifugation step. To provide in-depth acoustic characterization of the new construct we evaluated the effect of size and concentration on their in vitro and in vivo performance. In vitro and in vivo characterization were carried out for a range of bubble concentrations normalized by total gas volume quantified via headspace gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). In vitro characterization revealed that nanobubbles at different concentrations are more consistently stable over time with the highest and lowest dilutions (50-fold decrease) only differing in US signal after 8 min exposure by 10.34%, while for microbubbles the difference was 86.46%. As expected, due to the difference in hydrodynamic diameter and scattering cross section difference, nanobubbles showed lower overall initial signal intensity. In vivo experiments showed that both microbubbles and nanobubbles with similar initial peak signal intensity are comparably stable over time with 66.8% and 60.6% remaining signal after 30 min, respectively. This study demonstrates that bubble concentration has significant effects on the persistence of both microbubbles and nanobubbles in vitro and in vivo, but the effects are more pronounced in larger bubbles. These effects should be taken into account when selecting the appropriate bubble parameters for future imaging applications.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 30913884     DOI: 10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b00462

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Langmuir        ISSN: 0743-7463            Impact factor:   3.882


  13 in total

1.  Real time ultrasound molecular imaging of prostate cancer with PSMA-targeted nanobubbles.

Authors:  Reshani H Perera; Al de Leon; Xinning Wang; Yu Wang; Gopal Ramamurthy; Pubudu Peiris; Eric Abenojar; James P Basilion; Agata A Exner
Journal:  Nanomedicine       Date:  2020-04-26       Impact factor: 5.307

2.  Contrast enhanced ultrasound imaging by nature-inspired ultrastable echogenic nanobubbles.

Authors:  Al de Leon; Reshani Perera; Christopher Hernandez; Michaela Cooley; Olive Jung; Selva Jeganathan; Eric Abenojar; Grace Fishbein; Amin Jafari Sojahrood; Corey C Emerson; Phoebe L Stewart; Michael C Kolios; Agata A Exner
Journal:  Nanoscale       Date:  2019-08-13       Impact factor: 7.790

3.  Enhancing Tumor Drug Distribution With Ultrasound-Triggered Nanobubbles.

Authors:  Pinunta Nittayacharn; Hai-Xia Yuan; Christopher Hernandez; Peter Bielecki; Haoyan Zhou; Agata A Exner
Journal:  J Pharm Sci       Date:  2019-05-13       Impact factor: 3.534

4.  Bursting Microbubbles: How Nanobubble Contrast Agents Can Enable the Future of Medical Ultrasound Molecular Imaging and Image-Guided Therapy.

Authors:  Agata A Exner; Michael C Kolios
Journal:  Curr Opin Colloid Interface Sci       Date:  2021-05-02       Impact factor: 8.209

5.  Extrusion: A New Method for Rapid Formulation of High-Yield, Monodisperse Nanobubbles.

Authors:  Claire Counil; Eric Abenojar; Reshani Perera; Agata A Exner
Journal:  Small       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 15.153

6.  Microbubble Size and Dose Effects on Pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  J Angel Navarro-Becerra; Kang-Ho Song; Payton Martinez; Mark A Borden
Journal:  ACS Biomater Sci Eng       Date:  2022-03-31

7.  High-Frequency Array-Based Nanobubble Nonlinear Imaging in a Phantom and In Vivo.

Authors:  Carly Pellow; Emmanuel Cherin; Eric C Abenojar; Agata A Exner; Gang Zheng; Christine E M Demore; David E Goertz
Journal:  IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control       Date:  2021-05-25       Impact factor: 3.267

8.  Nested Nanobubbles for Ultrasound-Triggered Drug Release.

Authors:  Damien V B Batchelor; Radwa H Abou-Saleh; P Louise Coletta; James R McLaughlan; Sally A Peyman; Stephen D Evans
Journal:  ACS Appl Mater Interfaces       Date:  2020-06-19       Impact factor: 9.229

9.  Nanobubble Mediated Gene Delivery in Conjunction With a Hand-Held Ultrasound Scanner.

Authors:  Hiroshi Kida; Koyo Nishimura; Koki Ogawa; Akiko Watanabe; Loreto B Feril; Yutaka Irie; Hitomi Endo; Shigeru Kawakami; Katsuro Tachibana
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2020-04-01       Impact factor: 5.810

10.  Increasing Doxorubicin Loading in Lipid-Shelled Perfluoropropane Nanobubbles via a Simple Deprotonation Strategy.

Authors:  Pinunta Nittayacharn; Eric Abenojar; Al De Leon; Dana Wegierak; Agata A Exner
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2020-05-12       Impact factor: 5.810

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.