Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Single Cells

  • Madumali KalubowilageEmail author
  • Stefan H. Bossmann
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 2126)


This chapter discusses a methodology for simultaneously imaging stem cells and endothelial cells within polysaccharide-based scaffolds for tissue engineering. These scaffolds were then implanted into nude mice. Human mesenchymal stem cells (HMSCs) were labeled with the T1-marker Gd(iii)-DOTAGA-functionalized polysiloxane nanoparticles (GdNPs), whereas endothelial umbilical vein cells (HUVECs) were labeled with citrate-stabilized maghemite nanoparticles (IONPs), which predominantly shorten the T2-relaxation times of the water molecules in scaffolds and tissue. Dual cell detection was achieved by performing T1- and T2-weighted MRI in both tissue scaffolds and in vivo.

Key words

MRI Single cell imaging Tissue imaging Gadolinium chelates Iron oxide nanoparticles Cellular uptake vectors 


  1. 1.
    He X (2017) Microscale biomaterials with bioinspired complexity of early embryo development and in the ovary for tissue engineering and regenerative medicine. ACS Biomater Sci Eng 3:2692–2701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bulte JWM (2009) In vivo MRI cell tracking: clinical studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 193:314–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Currie S, Hoggard N, Craven IJ et al (2013) Understanding MRI: basic MR physics for physicians. Postgrad Med J 89:209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gossuin Y, Hocq A, Gillis P et al (2010) Physics of magnetic resonance imaging: from spin to pixel. J Phys D Appl Phys 43:213001–213015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim D, Kim J, Park YI et al (2018) Recent development of inorganic nanoparticles for biomedical imaging. ACS Cent Sci 4:324–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Di Corato R, Gazeau F, Le Visage C et al (2013) High-resolution cellular MRI: gadolinium and iron oxide nanoparticles for in-depth dual-cell imaging of engineered tissue constructs. ACS Nano 7:7500–7512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Caravan P (2006) Strategies for increasing the sensitivity of gadolinium based MRI contrast agents. Chem Soc Rev 35:512–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Raymond KN, Pierre VC (2005) Next generation, high relaxivity gadolinium MRI agents. Bioconjug Chem 16:3–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Caravan P, Ellison JJ, Mcmurry TJ et al (1999) Gadolinium (III) chelates as MRI contrast agents: structure, dynamics, and applications. Chem Rev 99:2293–2352CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cohen SM, Xu J, Radkov E et al (2000) Syntheses and relaxation properties of mixed gadolinium hydroxypyridinonate MRI contrast agents. Inorg Chem 39:5747–5756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pierre VC, Botta M, Aime S et al (2006) Tuning the coordination number of hydroxypyridonate-based gadolinium complexes: implications for MRI contrast agents. J Am Chem Soc 128:5344–5345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zeng L, Wu D, Zou R et al (2018) Paramagnetic and Superparamagnetic Inorganic Nanoparticles for T1-Weighted Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Curr Med Chem 25:2970–2986CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Akbarzadeh A, Samiei M, Davaran S (2012) Magnetic nanoparticles: preparation, physical properties, and applications in biomedicine. Nanoscale Res Lett 7:1–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Podaru G, Chikan V (2017) Magnetism in nanomaterials: heat and force from colloidal magnetic particles. In: Bossmann SH, Wang H (eds) Magnetic nanomaterials: applications in catalysis and life sciences. Royal Society of Chemistry, London, pp 1–21Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mosquera J, Garcia I, Liz-Marzan LM (2018) Cellular uptake of nanoparticles versus small molecules: a matter of size. Acc Chem Res 51:2305–2313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chung H-J, Lee H-S, Bae KH et al (2011) Facile synthetic route for surface-functionalized magnetic nanoparticles: cell labeling and magnetic resonance imaging studies. ACS Nano 5:4329–4336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wilhelm C, Gazeau F (2008) Universal cell labeling with anionic magnetic nanoparticles. Biomaterials 29:3161–3174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lux F, Mignot A, Mowat P et al (2011) Ultrasmall rigid particles as multimodal probes for medical applications. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 50:12299–12303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Autissier A, Le Visage C, Pouzet C et al (2010) Fabrication of porous polysaccharide-based scaffolds using a combined freeze-drying/cross-linking process. Acta Biomater 6:3640–3648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Le Visage C, Gournay O, Benguirat N et al (2012) Mesenchymal stem cell delivery into rat infarcted myocardium using a porous polysaccharide-based scaffold: a quantitative comparison with endocardial injection. Tissue Eng Part A 18:35–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Poirier-Quinot M, Frasca G, Wilhelm C et al (2010) High-resolution 1.5-Tesla magnetic resonance imaging for tissue-engineered constructs: a noninvasive tool to assess three-dimensional scaffold architecture and cell seeding. Tissue Eng Part C Methods 16:185–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ChemistryKansas State UniversityManhattanUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemistry and Johnson Cancer CenterKansas State UniversityManhattanUSA

Personalised recommendations