Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
Volume 35, Issue 8 , Pages 1298-1308, August 2009

Blood-Brain Barrier (BBB) Disruption Using a Diagnostic Ultrasound Scanner and Definity® in Mice

  • Kristin Frinkley Bing

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationAddress correspondence to: Kristin F. Bing, Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, 136 Hudson Hall, Durham, NC 27708.
  • ,
  • Gabriel P. Howles

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
    • Center for In Vivo Microscopy, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
  • ,
  • Yi Qi

      Affiliations

    • Center for In Vivo Microscopy, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC, USA
  • ,
  • Mark L. Palmeri

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
  • ,
  • Kathryn R. Nightingale

      Affiliations

    • Department of Biomedical Engineering, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

Received 15 May 2008; received in revised form 5 March 2009; accepted 10 March 2009. published online 22 June 2009.

Abstract 

The objective of this work was to determine whether diagnostic ultrasound and contrast agent could be used to transcranially and nondestructively disrupt the blood-brain barrier (BBB) in mice under ultrasound image guidance and to quantify that disruption using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and magnetic resonance (MR) contrast agent. Each mouse was placed under isoflurane anesthesia and the hair on top of its skull was removed before treatment. A diagnostic ultrasound transducer was placed in a water bag coupled with gel on the mouse skull. Definity (ultrasound [US] contrast) and Magnevist (MR contrast) were injected concurrent with the start of a custom ultrasound transmission sequence. The transducer was translated along the rostral-caudal axis to insonify three spatial locations (2mm apart) along one half of the brain for each sequence. T1-weighted MR images were used to quantify the volume of tissue over which the BBB disruption allowed Magnevist to enter the brain, based upon increases in MR contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) compared with the noninsonified portions of the brain. Ultrasonic frequency, pressure and pulse duration, as well as Definity dose and injection time were varied. Preliminary results suggest that a threshold exists for BBB opening dependent upon both pressure and pulse duration (consistent with reports in the literature performed at lower frequencies). A range of typical diagnostic frequencies (e.g., 5.0–8.0MHz) generated BBB disruption. Comparable BBB opening was noted with varied delays between Definity injection and insonification (0–2min) for a range of Definity concentrations (400-2400μL/kg). The low-pressure, custom sequences (mechanical index [MI]0.65) had minimal blood cell extravasation as determined by histologic evaluation. This study has shown the ability of a diagnostic ultrasound system, in conjunction with Definity, to open the BBB transcranially in a mouse model for molecules approximately 0.5kDa in size. Opening was achieved at higher frequencies than previously reported and was localized under ultrasound image guidance. A typical, ultrasound imaging mode (pulsed wave [PW] Doppler) with specific settings (transmit frequency=5.7MHz, gate size=15mm, pulse repetition frequency=100Hz, system power=15%) successfully opened the BBB, which facilitates implementation using the most of commercially available clinical diagnostic scanners. Localized opening of the BBB may have potential clinical utility for the delivery of diagnostic or therapeutic agents to the brain. (Email: kdf2@duke.edu)

Key Words: Ultrasound, Contrast agent, Blood-brain barrier, Drug delivery, Magnetic resonance imaging

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

PII: S0301-5629(09)00112-4

doi:10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2009.03.012

Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology
Volume 35, Issue 8 , Pages 1298-1308, August 2009