Vibrational Responses of Bound and Nonbound Targeted Lipid-Coated Single Microbubbles
One of the main challenges for ultrasound molecular imaging is acoustically distinguishing nonbound microbubbles from those bound to their molecular target. In this in vitro study, we compared two types of in-house produced targeted lipid-coated microbubbles, either consisting of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control ferroelectrics, and frequency control, 2017-05, Vol.64 (5), p.785-797 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 797 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 785 |
container_title | IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control |
container_volume | 64 |
creator | van Rooij, Tom Beekers, Ines Lattwein, Kirby R. van der Steen, Antonius F. W. de Jong, Nico Kooiman, Klazina |
description | One of the main challenges for ultrasound molecular imaging is acoustically distinguishing nonbound microbubbles from those bound to their molecular target. In this in vitro study, we compared two types of in-house produced targeted lipid-coated microbubbles, either consisting of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C16:0 (DPPC) or 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C18:0 (DSPC) as the main lipid, using the Brandaris 128 ultrahigh-speed camera to determine vibrational response differences between bound and nonbound biotinylated microbubbles. In contrast to previous studies that studied vibrational differences upon binding, we used a covalently bound model biomarker (i.e., streptavidin) rather than physisorption, to ensure binding of the biomarker to the membrane. The microbubbles were insonified at frequencies between 1 and 4 MHz at pressures of 50 and 150 kPa. This paper shows lower acoustic stability of bound microbubbles, of which DPPC-based microbubbles deflated most. For DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm driven at 50 kPa, resonance frequencies of bound microbubbles were all higher than 1.8 MHz, whereas those of nonbound microbubbles were significantly lower. In addition, the relative radial excursions at resonance were also higher for bound DPPC microbubbles. These differences did not persist when the pressure was increased to 150 kPa, except for the acoustic stability which further decreased. No differences in resonance frequencies were observed between bound and nonbound DSPC microbubbles. Nonlinear responses in terms of emissions at the subharmonic and second harmonic frequencies were similar for bound and nonbound microbubbles at both pressures. In conclusion, we identified differences in vibrational responses of bound DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm that distinguish them from nonbound ones. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1109/TUFFC.2017.2679160 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmed_primary_28287967</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ieee_id>7873351</ieee_id><sourcerecordid>1877526738</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-87fd466eb990beb347bd33c9a083abd6351aeb270bf69a62edbd48a9371a37823</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kEtPwzAQhC0EoqXwB0BCOXJJ8SPx4wgRBaQCErRcLTveVEZpXOLkwL8nfcBhtVrtzGj0IXRJ8JQQrG4Xy9msmFJMxJRyoQjHR2hMcpqnUuX5MRpjKfOUYYJH6CzGL4xJlil6ikZUUikUF2O0_PS2NZ0PjamTd4ib0ESISaiS-9A3LjHDvIbG7o6FaVfQgUvmfuNdWgSzPT58s6ohefFlG2xvbQ3xHJ1Upo5wcdgTtJw9LIqndP72-FzczdOScdGlUlQu4xysUtiCZZmwjrFSGSyZsY6znBiwVGBbcWU4BWddJo1ighgmJGUTdLPP3bThu4fY6bWPJdS1aSD0URMpRD6wYXKQ0r10aBljC5XetH5t2h9NsN7i1DuceotTH3AOputDfm_X4P4tf_wGwdVe4AHg_y2kYEN39gvAiHnK</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1877526738</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Vibrational Responses of Bound and Nonbound Targeted Lipid-Coated Single Microbubbles</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL)</source><creator>van Rooij, Tom ; Beekers, Ines ; Lattwein, Kirby R. ; van der Steen, Antonius F. W. ; de Jong, Nico ; Kooiman, Klazina</creator><creatorcontrib>van Rooij, Tom ; Beekers, Ines ; Lattwein, Kirby R. ; van der Steen, Antonius F. W. ; de Jong, Nico ; Kooiman, Klazina</creatorcontrib><description>One of the main challenges for ultrasound molecular imaging is acoustically distinguishing nonbound microbubbles from those bound to their molecular target. In this in vitro study, we compared two types of in-house produced targeted lipid-coated microbubbles, either consisting of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C16:0 (DPPC) or 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C18:0 (DSPC) as the main lipid, using the Brandaris 128 ultrahigh-speed camera to determine vibrational response differences between bound and nonbound biotinylated microbubbles. In contrast to previous studies that studied vibrational differences upon binding, we used a covalently bound model biomarker (i.e., streptavidin) rather than physisorption, to ensure binding of the biomarker to the membrane. The microbubbles were insonified at frequencies between 1 and 4 MHz at pressures of 50 and 150 kPa. This paper shows lower acoustic stability of bound microbubbles, of which DPPC-based microbubbles deflated most. For DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm driven at 50 kPa, resonance frequencies of bound microbubbles were all higher than 1.8 MHz, whereas those of nonbound microbubbles were significantly lower. In addition, the relative radial excursions at resonance were also higher for bound DPPC microbubbles. These differences did not persist when the pressure was increased to 150 kPa, except for the acoustic stability which further decreased. No differences in resonance frequencies were observed between bound and nonbound DSPC microbubbles. Nonlinear responses in terms of emissions at the subharmonic and second harmonic frequencies were similar for bound and nonbound microbubbles at both pressures. In conclusion, we identified differences in vibrational responses of bound DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm that distinguish them from nonbound ones.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0885-3010</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1525-8955</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1109/TUFFC.2017.2679160</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28287967</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ITUCER</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: IEEE</publisher><subject>Acoustics ; Biological system modeling ; Biomembranes ; Biotin - chemistry ; Biotin-streptavidin ; Biotinylation ; Contrast Media - chemistry ; Frequency control ; lipid-coating ; Lipidomics ; Lipids - chemistry ; Microbubbles ; molecular imaging ; Molecular Imaging - methods ; nonlinear behavior ; Optical Imaging ; Resonant frequency ; Streptavidin ; targeted microbubbles ; ultrahigh-speed optical imaging ; Ultrasonic imaging ; ultrasound contrast agents ; Vibration</subject><ispartof>IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control, 2017-05, Vol.64 (5), p.785-797</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-87fd466eb990beb347bd33c9a083abd6351aeb270bf69a62edbd48a9371a37823</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-87fd466eb990beb347bd33c9a083abd6351aeb270bf69a62edbd48a9371a37823</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3163-7376</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7873351$$EHTML$$P50$$Gieee$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,782,786,798,27933,27934,54767</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28287967$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>van Rooij, Tom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beekers, Ines</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lattwein, Kirby R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Steen, Antonius F. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jong, Nico</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kooiman, Klazina</creatorcontrib><title>Vibrational Responses of Bound and Nonbound Targeted Lipid-Coated Single Microbubbles</title><title>IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control</title><addtitle>T-UFFC</addtitle><addtitle>IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control</addtitle><description>One of the main challenges for ultrasound molecular imaging is acoustically distinguishing nonbound microbubbles from those bound to their molecular target. In this in vitro study, we compared two types of in-house produced targeted lipid-coated microbubbles, either consisting of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C16:0 (DPPC) or 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C18:0 (DSPC) as the main lipid, using the Brandaris 128 ultrahigh-speed camera to determine vibrational response differences between bound and nonbound biotinylated microbubbles. In contrast to previous studies that studied vibrational differences upon binding, we used a covalently bound model biomarker (i.e., streptavidin) rather than physisorption, to ensure binding of the biomarker to the membrane. The microbubbles were insonified at frequencies between 1 and 4 MHz at pressures of 50 and 150 kPa. This paper shows lower acoustic stability of bound microbubbles, of which DPPC-based microbubbles deflated most. For DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm driven at 50 kPa, resonance frequencies of bound microbubbles were all higher than 1.8 MHz, whereas those of nonbound microbubbles were significantly lower. In addition, the relative radial excursions at resonance were also higher for bound DPPC microbubbles. These differences did not persist when the pressure was increased to 150 kPa, except for the acoustic stability which further decreased. No differences in resonance frequencies were observed between bound and nonbound DSPC microbubbles. Nonlinear responses in terms of emissions at the subharmonic and second harmonic frequencies were similar for bound and nonbound microbubbles at both pressures. In conclusion, we identified differences in vibrational responses of bound DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm that distinguish them from nonbound ones.</description><subject>Acoustics</subject><subject>Biological system modeling</subject><subject>Biomembranes</subject><subject>Biotin - chemistry</subject><subject>Biotin-streptavidin</subject><subject>Biotinylation</subject><subject>Contrast Media - chemistry</subject><subject>Frequency control</subject><subject>lipid-coating</subject><subject>Lipidomics</subject><subject>Lipids - chemistry</subject><subject>Microbubbles</subject><subject>molecular imaging</subject><subject>Molecular Imaging - methods</subject><subject>nonlinear behavior</subject><subject>Optical Imaging</subject><subject>Resonant frequency</subject><subject>Streptavidin</subject><subject>targeted microbubbles</subject><subject>ultrahigh-speed optical imaging</subject><subject>Ultrasonic imaging</subject><subject>ultrasound contrast agents</subject><subject>Vibration</subject><issn>0885-3010</issn><issn>1525-8955</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ESBDL</sourceid><sourceid>RIE</sourceid><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNo9kEtPwzAQhC0EoqXwB0BCOXJJ8SPx4wgRBaQCErRcLTveVEZpXOLkwL8nfcBhtVrtzGj0IXRJ8JQQrG4Xy9msmFJMxJRyoQjHR2hMcpqnUuX5MRpjKfOUYYJH6CzGL4xJlil6ikZUUikUF2O0_PS2NZ0PjamTd4ib0ESISaiS-9A3LjHDvIbG7o6FaVfQgUvmfuNdWgSzPT58s6ohefFlG2xvbQ3xHJ1Upo5wcdgTtJw9LIqndP72-FzczdOScdGlUlQu4xysUtiCZZmwjrFSGSyZsY6znBiwVGBbcWU4BWddJo1ighgmJGUTdLPP3bThu4fY6bWPJdS1aSD0URMpRD6wYXKQ0r10aBljC5XetH5t2h9NsN7i1DuceotTH3AOputDfm_X4P4tf_wGwdVe4AHg_y2kYEN39gvAiHnK</recordid><startdate>201705</startdate><enddate>201705</enddate><creator>van Rooij, Tom</creator><creator>Beekers, Ines</creator><creator>Lattwein, Kirby R.</creator><creator>van der Steen, Antonius F. W.</creator><creator>de Jong, Nico</creator><creator>Kooiman, Klazina</creator><general>IEEE</general><scope>97E</scope><scope>ESBDL</scope><scope>RIA</scope><scope>RIE</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3163-7376</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>201705</creationdate><title>Vibrational Responses of Bound and Nonbound Targeted Lipid-Coated Single Microbubbles</title><author>van Rooij, Tom ; Beekers, Ines ; Lattwein, Kirby R. ; van der Steen, Antonius F. W. ; de Jong, Nico ; Kooiman, Klazina</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c367t-87fd466eb990beb347bd33c9a083abd6351aeb270bf69a62edbd48a9371a37823</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Acoustics</topic><topic>Biological system modeling</topic><topic>Biomembranes</topic><topic>Biotin - chemistry</topic><topic>Biotin-streptavidin</topic><topic>Biotinylation</topic><topic>Contrast Media - chemistry</topic><topic>Frequency control</topic><topic>lipid-coating</topic><topic>Lipidomics</topic><topic>Lipids - chemistry</topic><topic>Microbubbles</topic><topic>molecular imaging</topic><topic>Molecular Imaging - methods</topic><topic>nonlinear behavior</topic><topic>Optical Imaging</topic><topic>Resonant frequency</topic><topic>Streptavidin</topic><topic>targeted microbubbles</topic><topic>ultrahigh-speed optical imaging</topic><topic>Ultrasonic imaging</topic><topic>ultrasound contrast agents</topic><topic>Vibration</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>van Rooij, Tom</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beekers, Ines</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lattwein, Kirby R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van der Steen, Antonius F. W.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Jong, Nico</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kooiman, Klazina</creatorcontrib><collection>IEEE All-Society Periodicals Package (ASPP) 2005-present</collection><collection>IEEE Open Access Journals</collection><collection>IEEE All-Society Periodicals Package (ASPP) 1998-Present</collection><collection>IEEE Electronic Library (IEL)</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>van Rooij, Tom</au><au>Beekers, Ines</au><au>Lattwein, Kirby R.</au><au>van der Steen, Antonius F. W.</au><au>de Jong, Nico</au><au>Kooiman, Klazina</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Vibrational Responses of Bound and Nonbound Targeted Lipid-Coated Single Microbubbles</atitle><jtitle>IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control</jtitle><stitle>T-UFFC</stitle><addtitle>IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Freq Control</addtitle><date>2017-05</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>64</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>785</spage><epage>797</epage><pages>785-797</pages><issn>0885-3010</issn><eissn>1525-8955</eissn><coden>ITUCER</coden><abstract>One of the main challenges for ultrasound molecular imaging is acoustically distinguishing nonbound microbubbles from those bound to their molecular target. In this in vitro study, we compared two types of in-house produced targeted lipid-coated microbubbles, either consisting of 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C16:0 (DPPC) or 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, C18:0 (DSPC) as the main lipid, using the Brandaris 128 ultrahigh-speed camera to determine vibrational response differences between bound and nonbound biotinylated microbubbles. In contrast to previous studies that studied vibrational differences upon binding, we used a covalently bound model biomarker (i.e., streptavidin) rather than physisorption, to ensure binding of the biomarker to the membrane. The microbubbles were insonified at frequencies between 1 and 4 MHz at pressures of 50 and 150 kPa. This paper shows lower acoustic stability of bound microbubbles, of which DPPC-based microbubbles deflated most. For DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm driven at 50 kPa, resonance frequencies of bound microbubbles were all higher than 1.8 MHz, whereas those of nonbound microbubbles were significantly lower. In addition, the relative radial excursions at resonance were also higher for bound DPPC microbubbles. These differences did not persist when the pressure was increased to 150 kPa, except for the acoustic stability which further decreased. No differences in resonance frequencies were observed between bound and nonbound DSPC microbubbles. Nonlinear responses in terms of emissions at the subharmonic and second harmonic frequencies were similar for bound and nonbound microbubbles at both pressures. In conclusion, we identified differences in vibrational responses of bound DPPC microbubbles with diameters between 2 and 4 μm that distinguish them from nonbound ones.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>IEEE</pub><pmid>28287967</pmid><doi>10.1109/TUFFC.2017.2679160</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3163-7376</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0885-3010 |
ispartof | IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control, 2017-05, Vol.64 (5), p.785-797 |
issn | 0885-3010 1525-8955 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmed_primary_28287967 |
source | MEDLINE; IEEE Electronic Library (IEL) |
subjects | Acoustics Biological system modeling Biomembranes Biotin - chemistry Biotin-streptavidin Biotinylation Contrast Media - chemistry Frequency control lipid-coating Lipidomics Lipids - chemistry Microbubbles molecular imaging Molecular Imaging - methods nonlinear behavior Optical Imaging Resonant frequency Streptavidin targeted microbubbles ultrahigh-speed optical imaging Ultrasonic imaging ultrasound contrast agents Vibration |
title | Vibrational Responses of Bound and Nonbound Targeted Lipid-Coated Single Microbubbles |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-02T21%3A27%3A55IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Vibrational%20Responses%20of%20Bound%20and%20Nonbound%20Targeted%20Lipid-Coated%20Single%20Microbubbles&rft.jtitle=IEEE%20transactions%20on%20ultrasonics,%20ferroelectrics,%20and%20frequency%20control&rft.au=van%20Rooij,%20Tom&rft.date=2017-05&rft.volume=64&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=785&rft.epage=797&rft.pages=785-797&rft.issn=0885-3010&rft.eissn=1525-8955&rft.coden=ITUCER&rft_id=info:doi/10.1109/TUFFC.2017.2679160&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1877526738%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1877526738&rft_id=info:pmid/28287967&rft_ieee_id=7873351&rfr_iscdi=true |