MRI contrast agents: Classification and application (Review)

Xiao,Yu-Dong; Paudel,Ramchandra; Liu,Jun; Ma,Cong; Zhang,Zi-Shu; Zhou,Shun-Ke

doi:10.3892/ijmm.2016.2744

MRI contrast agents: Classification and application (Review)

Authors:
- Yu-Dong Xiao
- Ramchandra Paudel
- Jun Liu
- Cong Ma
- Zi-Shu Zhang
- Shun-Ke Zhou
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Radiology, The Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Changsha, Hunan 410011, P.R. China
Published online on: September 21, 2016 https://doi.org/10.3892/ijmm.2016.2744
Pages: 1319-1326

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) contrast agents are categorised according to the following specific features: chemical composition including the presence or absence of metal atoms, route of administration, magnetic properties, effect on the magnetic resonance image, biodistribution and imaging applications. The majority of these agents are either paramagnetic ion complexes or superparamagnetic magnetite particles and contain lanthanide elements such as gadolinium (Gd3+) or transition metal manganese (Mn2+). These elements shorten the T1 or T2 relaxation time, thereby causing increased signal intensity on T1-weighted images or reduced signal intensity on T2-weighted images. Most paramagnetic contrast agents are positive agents. These agents shorten the T1, so the enhanced parts appear bright on T1-weighted images. Dysprosium, superparamagnetic agents and ferromagnetic agents are negative contrast agents. The enhanced parts appear darker on T2-weighted images. MRI contrast agents incorporating chelating agents reduces storage in the human body, enhances excretion and reduces toxicity. MRI contrast agents may be administered orally or intravenously. According to biodistribution and applications, MRI contrast agents may be categorised into three types: extracellular fluid, blood pool and target/organ-specific agents. A number of contrast agents have been developed to selectively distinguish liver pathologies. Some agents are also capable of targeting other organs, inflammation as well as specific tumors.

View Figures

View References

1	Young IR, Clarke GJ, Bailes DR, Pennock JM, Doyle FH and Bydder GM: Enhancement of relaxation rate with paramagnetic contrast agents in NMR imaging. J Comput Tomogr. 5:543–547. 1981. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Carr DH, Brown J, Bydder GM, Weinmann HJ, Speck U, Thomas DJ and Young IR: Intravenous chelated gadolinium as a contrast agent in NMR imaging of cerebral tumours. Lancet. 1:484–486. 1984. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Tang JB, Sheng YQ, Hu HJ and Shen YQ: Macromolecular MRI contrast agents: structures, properties and applications. Prog Polym Sci. 38:462–502. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar
4	Geraldes CFGC and Laurent S: Classification and basic properties of contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging. Contrast Media Mol Imaging. 4:1–23. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
5	Mitchell DG: Liver I: Currently available gadolinium chelates. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 4:37–51. 1996.PubMed/NCBI
6	Wood ML and Hardy PA: Proton relaxation enhancement. J Magn Reson Imaging. 3:149–156. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
7	Gandhi SN, Brown MA, Wong JG, Aguirre DA and Sirlin CB: MR contrast agents for liver imaging: what, when, how. Radiographics. 26:1621–1636. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
8	Shokrollahi H: Contrast agents for MRI. Mater Sci Eng C. 33:4485–4497. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar
9	Yurt A and Kazanci N: Investigation of magnetic properties of various complexes prepared as contrast agents for MRI. J Mol Struct. 892:392–397. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar
10	Harisinghani MG, Jhaveri KS, Weissleder R, Schima W, Saini S, Hahn PF and Mueller PR: MRI contrast agents for evaluating focal hepatic lesions. Clin Radiol. 56:714–725. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Zhen ZP and Xie J: Development of manganese-based nanoparticles as contrast probes for magnetic resonance imaging. Theranostics. 2:45–54. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Silva AC, Lee JH, Aoki L and Koretsky AR: Manganese-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MEMRI): methodological and practical considerations. NMR Biomed. 17:532–543. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Lin YJ and Koretsky AP: Manganese ion enhances T-1-weighted MRI during brain activation: An approach to direct imaging of brain function. Magn Reson Med. 38:378–388. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
14	Paratala BS, Jacobson BD, Kanakia S, Francis LD and Sitharaman B: Physicochemical characterization, and relaxometry studies of micro-graphite oxide, graphene nanoplatelets, and nanoribbons. PloS One. 7:e381852012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Nakamura H, Ito N, Kotake F, Mizokami Y and Matsuoka T: Tumor-detecting capacity and clinical usefulness of SPIO-MRI in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. J Gastroenterol. 35:849–855. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
16	Na HB, Song IC and Hyeon T: Inorganic nanoparticles for MRI contrast agents. Adv Mater. 21:2133–2148. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar
17	Taylor RM, Huber DL, Monson TC, Ali AMS, Bisoffi M and Sillerud LO: Multifunctional iron platinum stealth immunomicelles: targeted detection of human prostate cancer cells using both fluorescence and magnetic resonance imaging. J Nanopart Res. 13:4717–4729. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Thunus L and Lejeune R: Overview of transition metal and lanthanide complexes as diagnostic tools. Coordin Chem Rev. 184:125–155. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar
19	Sijens PE, van den Bent MJ, Nowak PJ, van Dijk P and Oudkerk M: 1H chemical shift imaging reveals loss of brain tumor choline signal after administration of Gd-contrast. Magn Reson Med. 37:222–225. 1997. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
20	Chang CA: Magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents. Design and physicochemical properties of gadodiamide. Invest Radiol. 28(Suppl 1): S21–S27. 1993. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Runge VM, Clanton JA, Herzer WA, Gibbs SJ, Price AC, Partain CL and James AE Jr: Intravascular contrast agents suitable for magnetic resonance imaging. Radiology. 153:171–176. 1984. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Runge VM, Schoerner W, Niendorf HP, Laniado M, Koehler D, Claussen C, Felix R and James AE Jr: Initial clinical evaluation of gadolinium DTPA for contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Imaging. 3:27–35. 1985. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Kaplan GD, Aisen AM and Aravapalli SR: Preliminary clinical trial of gadodiamide injection: a new nonionic gadolinium contrast agent for MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1:57–62. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
24	Runge VM, Dean B, Lee C, Carolan F and Heard G: Phase III clinical evaluation of Gd-HP-DO3A in head and spine disease. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1:47–56. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
25	Cordova-Fraga T, Sosa M, Hernandez-Gonzalez MA, Reyes-Aguilera JA, Solorio S, Ramirez C, Bautista-Flores E, Reynaga G, Avila-Rodriguez M and De la Roca-Chiapas JM: Medlar (Achras sapota L.) as oral contrast agent for MRI of the gastrointestinal tract. Appl Magn Reson. 42:161–167. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
26	Mayo-Smith WW: Computed body tomography with MRI correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 173:2661999.
27	Jacobs KE, Behera D, Rosenberg J, Gold G, Moseley M, Yeomans D and Biswal S: Oral manganese as an MRI contrast agent for the detection of nociceptive activity. NMR Biomed. 25:563–569. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Li KC, Tart RP, Fitzsimmons JR, Storm BL, Mao J and Rolfes RJ: Barium sulfate suspension as a negative oral MRI contrast agent: in vitro and human optimization studies. Magn Reson Imaging. 9:141–150. 1991. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Verloh N, Utpatel K, Haimerl M, Zeman F, Fellner C, Fichtner-Feigl S, Teufel A, Stroszczynski C, Evert M and Wiggermann P: Liver fibrosis and Gd-EOB-DTPA-enhanced MRI: A histopathologic correlation. Sci Rep. 5:154082015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
30	Weissleder R, Bogdanov A and Papisov M: Drug targeting in magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Q. 8:55–63. 1992.PubMed/NCBI
31	Ahmad MW, Xu W, Kim SJ, Baeck JS, Chang Y, Bae JE, Chae KS, Park JA, Kim TJ and Lee GH: Potential dual imaging nanoparticle: Gd2O3 nanoparticle. Sci Rep. 5:85492015. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
32	Edelman RR, Siegel JB, Singer A, Dupuis K and Longmaid HE: Dynamic MR imaging of the liver with Gd-DTPA: initial clinical results. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 153:1213–1219. 1989. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Balci NC and Semelka RC: Contrast agents for MR imaging of the liver. Radiol Clin North Am. 43:887–898. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Nolte-Ernsting C, Adam G, Bücker A, Berges S, Bjørnerud A and Günther RW: Abdominal MR angiography performed using blood pool contrast agents: comparison of a new superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticle and a linear gadolinium polymer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 171:107–113. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
35	Lauffer RB, Parmelee DJ, Dunham SU, Ouellet HS, Dolan RP, Witte S, McMurry TJ and Walovitch RC: MS-325: albumin-targeted contrast agent for MR angiography. Radiology. 207:529–538. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Cavagna FM, Lorusso V, Anelli PL, Maggioni F and de Haën C: Preclinical profile and clinical potential of gadocoletic acid trisodium salt (B22956/1), a new intravascular contrast medium for MRI. Acad Radiol. 9(Suppl 2): S491–S494. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Curtet C, Maton F, Havet T, Slinkin M, Mishra A, Chatal JF and Muller RN: Polylysine-Gd-DTPAn and polylysine-Gd-DOTAn coupled to anti-CEA F(ab′)2 fragments as potential immunocontrast agents. Relaxometry, biodistribution, and magnetic resonance imaging in nude mice grafted with human colorectal carcinoma. Invest Radiol. 33:752–761. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
38	Løkling KE, Fossheim SL, Skurtveit R, Bjørnerud A and Klaveness J: pH-sensitive paramagnetic liposomes as MRI contrast agents: in vitro feasibility studies. Magn Reson Imaging. 19:731–738. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
39	Jung CW and Jacobs P: Physical and chemical properties of superparamagnetic iron oxide MR contrast agents: ferumoxides, ferumoxtran, ferumoxsil. Magn Reson Imaging. 13:661–674. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	Taupitz M, Schnorr J, Abramjuk C, Wagner S, Pilgrimm H, Hünigen H and Hamm B: New generation of monomer-stabilized very small superparamagnetic iron oxide particles (VSOP) as contrast medium for MR angiography: preclinical results in rats and rabbits. J Magn Reson Imaging. 12:905–911. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
41	Jung KH, Kim HK, Park JA, Nam KS, Lee GH, Chang Y and Kim TJ: Gd Complexes of DO3A-(Biphenyl-2,2′-bisamides) Conjugates as MRI Blood-Pool Contrast Agents. ACS Med Chem Lett. 3:1003–1007. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
42	Bourrinet P, Bengele HH, Bonnemain B, Dencausse A, Idee JM, Jacobs PM and Lewis JM: Preclinical safety and pharmacokinetic profile of ferumoxtran-10, an ultrasmall superparamagnetic iron oxide magnetic resonance contrast agent. Invest Radiol. 41:313–324. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
43	Weinmann HJ, Ebert W, Misselwitz B and Schmitt-Willich H: Tissue-specific MR contrast agents. Eur J Radiol. 46:33–44. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
44	Corot C and Warlin D: Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles for MRI: contrast media pharmaceutical company R&D perspective. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Nanomed Nanobiotechnol. 5:411–422. 2013.PubMed/NCBI
45	Runge VM: A comparison of two MR hepatobiliary gadolinium chelates: Gd-BOPTA and Gd-EOB-DTPA. J Comput Assist Tomogr. 22:643–650. 1998. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
46	Torres CG, Lundby B, Sterud AT, McGill S, Gordon PB and Bjerknes HS: MnDPDP for MR imaging of the liver - Results from the European phase III studies. Acta Radiol. 38:631–637. 1997.PubMed/NCBI