Cargando…

Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium

Introduction. Previously we proposed a cellular imaging technique to determine the surviving fraction of transplanted cells in vivo. Epicardial kinetics using Indium-111 determined the Debris Impulse Response Function (DIRF) and leakage coefficient parameters. Convolution-based modeling which correc...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Blackwood, Kimberley J., Sykes, Jane, Deans, Lela, Wisenberg, Gerald, Prato, Frank S.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2011
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3094859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21603238
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/472375
_version_ 1782203604379107328
author Blackwood, Kimberley J.
Sykes, Jane
Deans, Lela
Wisenberg, Gerald
Prato, Frank S.
author_facet Blackwood, Kimberley J.
Sykes, Jane
Deans, Lela
Wisenberg, Gerald
Prato, Frank S.
author_sort Blackwood, Kimberley J.
collection PubMed
description Introduction. Previously we proposed a cellular imaging technique to determine the surviving fraction of transplanted cells in vivo. Epicardial kinetics using Indium-111 determined the Debris Impulse Response Function (DIRF) and leakage coefficient parameters. Convolution-based modeling which corrected for these signal contributions indicated that (111)In activity was quantitative of cell viability with half-lives within 20 hrs to 37 days. We determine if the 37-day upper limit remains valid for endocardial injections by comparing previous epicardial cell leakage parameter estimates to those for endocardial cells. Methods. Normal canine myocardium was injected ((111)In-tropolone) epicardially (9 injections) or endocardially (10 injections). Continuous whole body and SPECT scans for 5 hours were acquired with three weekly follow-up imaging sessions up to 20–26 days. Time-activity curves evaluated each injection type. Results. The epicardial and endocardial kinetics were not significantly different (Epi: 1286 ± 253; Endo: 1567 ± 470 hours P = .62). Conclusion. The original epicardial estimate of leakage kinetics has been validated for use in endocardial injections.
format Text
id pubmed-3094859
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2011
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-30948592011-05-20 Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium Blackwood, Kimberley J. Sykes, Jane Deans, Lela Wisenberg, Gerald Prato, Frank S. Int J Mol Imaging Research Article Introduction. Previously we proposed a cellular imaging technique to determine the surviving fraction of transplanted cells in vivo. Epicardial kinetics using Indium-111 determined the Debris Impulse Response Function (DIRF) and leakage coefficient parameters. Convolution-based modeling which corrected for these signal contributions indicated that (111)In activity was quantitative of cell viability with half-lives within 20 hrs to 37 days. We determine if the 37-day upper limit remains valid for endocardial injections by comparing previous epicardial cell leakage parameter estimates to those for endocardial cells. Methods. Normal canine myocardium was injected ((111)In-tropolone) epicardially (9 injections) or endocardially (10 injections). Continuous whole body and SPECT scans for 5 hours were acquired with three weekly follow-up imaging sessions up to 20–26 days. Time-activity curves evaluated each injection type. Results. The epicardial and endocardial kinetics were not significantly different (Epi: 1286 ± 253; Endo: 1567 ± 470 hours P = .62). Conclusion. The original epicardial estimate of leakage kinetics has been validated for use in endocardial injections. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2011 2011-04-26 /pmc/articles/PMC3094859/ /pubmed/21603238 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/472375 Text en Copyright © 2011 Kimberley J. Blackwood et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Blackwood, Kimberley J.
Sykes, Jane
Deans, Lela
Wisenberg, Gerald
Prato, Frank S.
Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium
title Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium
title_full Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium
title_fullStr Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium
title_short Comparison of (111)In Leakage from Labeled Endocardial and Epicardial Cells: Impact on Modeling Viability of Cells to Be Transplanted into Myocardium
title_sort comparison of (111)in leakage from labeled endocardial and epicardial cells: impact on modeling viability of cells to be transplanted into myocardium
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3094859/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21603238
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2011/472375
work_keys_str_mv AT blackwoodkimberleyj comparisonof111inleakagefromlabeledendocardialandepicardialcellsimpactonmodelingviabilityofcellstobetransplantedintomyocardium
AT sykesjane comparisonof111inleakagefromlabeledendocardialandepicardialcellsimpactonmodelingviabilityofcellstobetransplantedintomyocardium
AT deanslela comparisonof111inleakagefromlabeledendocardialandepicardialcellsimpactonmodelingviabilityofcellstobetransplantedintomyocardium
AT wisenberggerald comparisonof111inleakagefromlabeledendocardialandepicardialcellsimpactonmodelingviabilityofcellstobetransplantedintomyocardium
AT pratofranks comparisonof111inleakagefromlabeledendocardialandepicardialcellsimpactonmodelingviabilityofcellstobetransplantedintomyocardium