Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende

Live-Webinar: Aktuelle Leitlinien bei Herz-Kreislauf-Erkrankungen

Konkret geht es um den Diabetes-Patienten mit kardiovaskulären Erkrankungen oder Risiken, die Herzinsuffizienz sowie die kardiovaskuläre Primär- und Sekundärprävention. Sind Sie hier schon auf dem neuesten Stand? Unsere Experten beleuchten, wo und warum das bisherige Procedere geändert werden soll und was in der Praxis sinnvoll ist. Holen Sie sich Ihr Update und 2 CME-Punkte beim MMW-Webinar am 24. April von 17.30 bis 19 Uhr. 
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Molecular Imaging and Biology
Erschienen in: Molecular Imaging and Biology 5/2018

01.10.2018 | Review Article

Standardization of Small Animal Imaging—Current Status and Future Prospects

verfasst von: Julia G. Mannheim, Firat Kara, Janine Doorduin, Kerstin Fuchs, Gerald Reischl, Sayuan Liang, Marleen Verhoye, Felix Gremse, Laura Mezzanotte, Marc C. Huisman

Erschienen in: Molecular Imaging and Biology | Ausgabe 5/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The benefit of small animal imaging is directly linked to the validity and reliability of the collected data. If the data (regardless of the modality used) are not reproducible and/or reliable, then the outcome of the data is rather questionable. Therefore, standardization of the use of small animal imaging equipment, as well as of animal handling in general, is of paramount importance. In a recent paper, guidance for efficient small animal imaging quality control was offered and discussed, among others, the use of phantoms in setting up a quality control program (Osborne et al. 2016). The same phantoms can be used to standardize image quality parameters for multi-center studies or multi-scanners within center studies. In animal experiments, the additional complexity due to animal handling needs to be addressed to ensure standardized imaging procedures. In this review, we will address the current status of standardization in preclinical imaging, as well as potential benefits from increased levels of standardization.
Literatur
1.
Yao R, Lecomte R, Crawford ES (2012) Small-animal PET: what is it, and why do we need it? J Nucl Med Technol 40:157–165PubMedCrossRef
2.
Woolfenden JM, Liu Z (2005) Biomedical significance of small-animal imaging. In: Kupinski MA, Barrett HH (eds) Small-animal SPECT imaging. Boston, Springer, pp 1–8
3.
Mariani G, Bruselli L, Kuwert T et al (2010) A review on the clinical uses of SPECT/CT. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37:1959–1985PubMedCrossRef
4.
Kuntner C, Stout D (2014) Quantitative preclinical PET imaging: opportunities and challenges. Front Phys 2:12CrossRef
5.
Lopci E, Nanni C, Castellucci P et al (2010) Imaging with non-FDG PET tracers: outlook for current clinical applications. Insights Imaging 1:373–385PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
Schmitz J, Schwab J, Schwenck J et al (2016) Decoding intratumoral heterogeneity of breast cancer by multiparametric in vivo imaging: a translational study. Cancer Res 76:5512–5522PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
Pagani E, Bizzi A, Di Salle F et al (2008) Basic concepts of advanced MRI techniques. Neurol Sci 29(Suppl 3):290–295PubMedCrossRef
8.
Basser PJ, Jones DK (2002) Diffusion-tensor MRI: theory,experimental design and data analysis - a technical review. NMR Biomed 15:456–467
9.
Brovko L (2010) Bioluminescence and fluorescence for in vivo imaging. SPIE Press, BellinghamCrossRef
10.
Roda A (2011) Chemiluminescence and bioluminescence: past, present and future. Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge
11.
Hilderbrand SA, Weissleder R (2010) Near-infrared fluorescence: application to in vivo molecular imaging. Curr Opin Chem Biol 14:71–79PubMedCrossRef
12.
Dhawan AP, D'Alessandro B, Fu X (2010) Optical imaging modalities for biomedical applications. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 3:69–92PubMedCrossRef
13.
Buzug TM (2004) Einleitung. In Einführung in die Computertomographie: Mathematisch-physikalische Grundlagen der Bildrekonstruktion. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp 1–10
14.
Liguori C, Frauenfelder G, Massaroni C et al (2015) Emerging clinical applications of computed tomography. Med Devices (Auckl) 8:265–278
15.
Holdsworth DW, Thornton MM (2002) Micro-CT in small animal and specimen imaging. Trends Biotechnol 20:S34–S39CrossRef
16.
Paulus MJ, Gleason SS, Easterly ME, Foltz CJ (2001) A review of high-resolution X-ray computed tomography and other imaging modalities for small animal research. Lab Anim 30:36–45
17.
Begley CG, Ioannidis JP (2015) Reproducibility in science: improving the standard for basic and preclinical research. Circ Res 116:116–126PubMedCrossRef
18.
Macleod MR, Michie S, Roberts I et al (2014) Biomedical research: increasing value, reducing waste. Lancet 383:101–104PubMedCrossRef
19.
Al-Shahi Salman R, Beller E, Kagan J et al (2014) Increasing value and reducing waste in biomedical research regulation and management. Lancet 383:176–185PubMedCrossRef
20.
O’Connor JP, Aboagye EO, Adams JE et al (2017) Imaging biomarker roadmap for cancer studies. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 14:169–186PubMedCrossRef
21.
Hounsfield GN (1973) Computerized transverse axial scanning (tomography). 1. Description of system. Br J Radiol 46:1016–1022PubMedCrossRef
22.
Parfitt AM, Drezner MK, Glorieux FH et al (1987) Bone histomorphometry: standardization of nomenclature, symbols, and units. Report of the ASBMR Histomorphometry Nomenclature Committee. J Bone Miner Res 2:595–610PubMedCrossRef
23.
Dempster DW, Compston JE, Drezner MK et al (2013) Standardized nomenclature, symbols, and units for bone histomorphometry: a 2012 update of the report of the ASBMR Histomorphometry Nomenclature Committee. J Bone Miner Res 28:2–17PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
24.
Bouxsein ML, Boyd SK, Christiansen BA et al (2010) Guidelines for assessment of bone microstructure in rodents using micro-computed tomography. J Bone Miner Res 25:1468–1486PubMedCrossRef
25.
Osborne DR, Kuntner C, Berr S, Stout D (2017) Guidance for efficient small animal imaging quality control. Mol Imaging Biol 19:485–498PubMedCrossRef
26.
Suomalainen A, Kiljunen T, Kaser Y et al (2009) Dosimetry and image quality of four dental cone beam computed tomography scanners compared with multislice computed tomography scanners. Dentomaxillofac Radiol 38:367–378PubMedCrossRef
27.
Song WY, Kamath S, Ozawa S et al (2008) A dose comparison study between XVI and OBI CBCT systems. Med Phys 35:480–486PubMedCrossRef
28.
Willekens I, Buls N, Lahoutte T et al (2010) Evaluation of the radiation dose in micro-CT with optimization of the scan protocol. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 5:201–207PubMedCrossRef
29.
Miyahara N, Kokubo T, Hara Y et al (2016) Evaluation of X-ray doses and their corresponding biological effects on experimental animals in cone-beam micro-CT scans (R-mCT2). Radiol Phys Technol 9:60–68PubMedCrossRef
30.
Osborne DR, Yan S, Stuckey A et al (2012) Characterization of X-ray dose in murine animals using microCT, a new low-dose detector and nanoDot dosimeters. PLoS One 7:e49936PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
31.
Staude A, Goebbels J (2011) Determining the spatial resolution in computed tomography—comparison of MTF and line-pair structures. In International symposium on digital industrial radiology and computed tomography (Proceedings). pp 1-9
32.
Fahey FH (2002) Data acquisition in PET imaging. J Nucl Med Technol 30:39–49PubMed
33.
Bailey DL, Karp JS, Surti S (2005) Physics and instrumentation in PET. In: Bailey DL, Townsend DW, Valk PE, Maisey MN (eds) Positron emission tomography: basic sciences. Springer, London, pp 13–39CrossRef
34.
Tai YC, Laforest R (2005) Instrumentation aspects of animal PET. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 7:255–285PubMedCrossRef
35.
Peremans K, Cornelissen B, Van Den Bossche B et al (2005) A review of small animal imaging planar and pinhole spect Gamma camera imaging. Vet Radiol Ultrasound 46:162–170PubMedCrossRef
36.
Wirrwar A, Schramm N, Vosberg H, Muller-Gartner HW (2001) High resolution SPECT in small animal research. Rev Neurosci 12:187–193PubMedCrossRef
37.
Meikle SR, Kench P, Kassiou M, Banati RB (2005) Small animal SPECT and its place in the matrix of molecular imaging technologies. Phys Med Biol 50:R45–61
38.
Franc BL, Acton PD, Mari C, Hasegawa BH (2008) Small-animal SPECT and SPECT/CT: important tools for preclinical investigation. J Nucl Med 49:1651–1663
39.
Hutchins GD, Miller MA, Soon VC, Receveur T (2008) Small animal PET imaging. ILAR J 49:54–65PubMedCrossRef
40.
41.
42.
43.
Deleye S, Van Holen R, Verhaeghe J, Vandenberghe S, Stroobants S, Staelens S (2013) Performance evaluation of small-animal multipinhole muSPECT scanners for mouse imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 40:744–758
44.
Sanchez F, Orero A, Soriano A, et al. (2013) ALBIRA: a small animal PETSPECTCT imaging system. Med Phys 40:051906
45.
Boisson F, Zahra D, Parmar A, et al. (2013) Imaging capabilities of the Inveon SPECT system using single-and multipinhole collimators. J Nucl Med 54:1833–1840
46.
Boellaard R, O’Doherty MJ, Weber WA et al (2010) FDG PET and PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour PET imaging: version 1.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 37:181–200PubMedCrossRef
47.
Boellaard R, Delgado-Bolton R, Oyen WJ et al (2015) FDG PET/CT: EANM procedure guidelines for tumour imaging: version 2.0. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 42:328–354PubMedCrossRef
48.
Aide N, Lasnon C, Veit-Haibach P et al (2017) EANM/EARL harmonization strategies in PET quantification: from daily practice to multicentre oncological studies. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 44:17–31PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Wahl RL, Jacene H, Kasamon Y, Lodge MA (2009) From RECIST to PERCIST: evolving considerations for PET response criteria in solid tumors. J Nucl Med 50(Suppl 1):122S–150SPubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Landis SC, Amara SG, Asadullah K et al (2012) A call for transparent reporting to optimize the predictive value of preclinical research. Nature 490:187–191PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Anderson JA, Eijkholt M, Illes J (2013) Ethical reproducibility: towards transparent reporting in biomedical research. Nat Methods 10:843–845PubMedCrossRef
52.
53.
Mannheim JG, Judenhofer MS, Schmid A et al (2012) Quantification accuracy and partial volume effect in dependence of the attenuation correction of a state-of-the-art small animal PET scanner. Phys Med Biol 57:3981–3993PubMedCrossRef
54.
55.
Hume SP, Gunn RN, Jones T (1998) Pharmacological constraints associated with positron emission tomographic scanning of small laboratory animals. Eur J Nucl Med 25:173–176PubMedCrossRef
56.
Stout D, Berr SS, LeBlanc A et al (2013) Guidance for methods descriptions used in preclinical imaging papers. Mol Imaging 12:1–15PubMedCrossRef
57.
Jezzard P, Song AW (1996) Technical foundations and pitfalls of clinical fMRI. NeuroImage 4:S63–S75PubMedCrossRef
58.
59.
Currie S, Hoggard N, Craven IJ et al (2013) Understanding MRI: basic MR physics for physicians. Postgrad Med J 89:209–223PubMedCrossRef
60.
61.
Mansfield P, Grannell PK (1973) NMR ‘diffraction’ in solids? J Phys C Solid State Phys 6:L422CrossRef
62.
Lauterbur PC (1973) Image formation by induced local interactions: examples employing nuclear magnetic resonance. Nature 242:190–191CrossRef
63.
Purcell EM, Torrey HC, Pound RV (1946) Resonance absorption by nuclear magnetic moments in a solid. Phys Rev 69:37–38CrossRef
64.
65.
Marzola P, Osculati F, Sbarbati A (2003) High field MRI in preclinical research. Eur J Radiol 48:165–170PubMedCrossRef
66.
Sharma R (2009) Microimaging of hairless rat skin by magnetic resonance at 900 MHz. Magn Reson Imaging 27:240–255PubMedCrossRef
67.
Nagy K, Toth M, Major P et al (2013) Performance evaluation of the small-animal nanoScan PET/MRI system. J Nucl Med 54:1825–1832PubMedCrossRef
68.
69.
70.
Ahrens ET, Narasimhan PT, Nakada T, Jacobs RE (2002) Small animal neuroimaging using magnetic resonance microscopy. Prog Nucl Magn Reson Spectrosc 40:275–306CrossRef
71.
Friedman L, Glover GH, The FBIRN Consort (2006) Reducing interscanner variability of activation in a multicenter fMRI study: controlling for signal-to-fluctuation-noise-ratio (SFNR) differences. NeuroImage 33:471–481PubMedCrossRef
72.
Ewers M, Teipel SJ, Dietrich O et al (2006) Multicenter assessment of reliability of cranial MRI. Neurobiol Aging 27:1051–1059PubMedCrossRef
73.
Teipel S, Ewers M, Dietrich O et al (2006) Reliability of multicenter magnetic resonance imaging. Results of a phantom test and in vivo measurements by the German Dementia Competence Network. Nervenarzt 77(1086–1092):1094–1085
74.
Schnack HG, van Haren NE, Hulshoff Pol HE et al (2004) Reliability of brain volumes from multicenter MRI acquisition: a calibration study. Hum Brain Mapp 22:312–320PubMedCrossRef
75.
Stocker T, Schneider F, Klein M et al (2005) Automated quality assurance routines for fMRI data applied to a multicenter study. Hum Brain Mapp 25:237–246PubMedCrossRef
76.
Zou KH, Greve DN, Wang M et al (2005) Reproducibility of functional MR imaging: preliminary results of prospective multi-institutional study performed by Biomedical Informatics Research Network. Radiology 237:781–789PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
77.
Chang L, Lee PL, Yiannoutsos CT et al (2004) A multicenter in vivo proton-MRS study of HIV-associated dementia and its relationship to age. NeuroImage 23:1336–1347PubMedCrossRef
78.
Mutsaerts HJMM, van Osch MJP, Zelaya FO et al (2015) Multi-vendor reliability of arterial spin labeling perfusion MRI using a near-identical sequence: Implications for multi-center studies. NeuroImage 113:143–152PubMedCrossRef
79.
van der Graaf M, Julia-Sape M, Howe FA et al (2008) MRS quality assessment in a multicentre study on MRS-based classification of brain tumours. NMR Biomed 21:148–158PubMedCrossRef
80.
Brueggen K, Grothe MJ, Dyrba M et al (2017) The European DTI Study on Dementia—a multicenter DTI and MRI study on Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. NeuroImage 144:305–308PubMedCrossRef
81.
Jovicich J, Czanner S, Greve D et al (2006) Reliability in multi-site structural MRI studies: effects of gradient non-linearity correction on phantom and human data. NeuroImage 30:436–443PubMedCrossRef
82.
Littmann A, Guehring J, Buechel C, Stiehl HS (2006) Acquisition-related morphological variability in structural MRI. Acad Radiol 13:1055–1061PubMedCrossRef
83.
Jonckers E, Shah D, Hamaide J et al (2015) The power of using functional fMRI on small rodents to study brain pharmacology and disease. Front Pharmacol 6:231PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
84.
85.
Uludağ K, Uğurbil K, Berliner L (2015) fMRI: from nuclear spins to brain functions. Springer
86.
87.
88.
89.
Van der Linden A, Van Camp N, Ramos-Cabrer P, Hoehn M (2007) Current status of functional MRI on small animals: application to physiology, pathophysiology, and cognition. NMR Biomed 20:522–545PubMedCrossRef
90.
Detre JA, Wang JJ, Wang Z, Rao HY (2009) Arterial spin-labeled perfusion MRI in basic and clinical neuroscience. Curr Opin Neurol 22:348–355PubMedCrossRef
91.
Ge YL, Law M, Johnson G et al (2005) Dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging of multiple sclerosis lesions: characterizing hemodynamic impairment and inflammatory activity. Am J Neuroradiol 26:1539–1547PubMed
92.
Yang S, Law M, Zagzag D et al (2003) Dynamic contrast-enhanced perfusion MR imaging measurements of endothelial permeability: differentiation between atypical and typical meningiomas. Am J Neuroradiol 24:1554–1559PubMed
93.
Haynes JD (2015) A primer on pattern-based approaches to fMRI: principles, pitfalls, and perspectives. Neuron 87:257–270PubMedCrossRef
94.
Thomas ML, Brown GG, Thompson WK et al (2013) An application of item response theory to fMRI data: prospects and pitfalls. Psychiatry Res 212:167–174PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
95.
Davis T, Poldrack RA (2013) Measuring neural representations with fMRI: practices and pitfalls. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1296:108–134PubMedCrossRef
96.
97.
Chen Z, Calhoun VD (2011) Two pitfalls of BOLD fMRI magnitude-based neuroimage analysis: non-negativity and edge effect. J Neurosci Methods 199:363–369PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
98.
Cole DM, Smith SM, Beckmann CF (2010) Advances and pitfalls in the analysis and interpretation of resting-state FMRI data. Front Syst Neurosci 4:8PubMedPubMedCentral
99.
100.
101.
Schroeter A, Schlegel F, Seuwen A et al (2014) Specificity of stimulus-evoked fMRI responses in the mouse: the influence of systemic physiological changes associated with innocuous stimulation under four different anesthetics. NeuroImage 94:372–384PubMedCrossRef
102.
Ramsey NF, Hoogduin H, Jansma JM (2002) Functional MRI experiments: acquisition, analysis and interpretation of data. Eur Neuropsychopharmacol 12:517–526PubMedCrossRef
103.
Peeters R, Sunaert S (2015) Clinical BOLD fMRI and DTI: artifacts, tips, and tricks. In Clinical functional MRI: presurgical functional neuroimaging. Ed. Stippich C. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp 313–336
104.
Silva AC, Lee JH, Aoki L, Koretsky AR (2004) Manganese-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (MEMRI): methodological and practical considerations. NMR Biomed 17:532–543PubMedCrossRef
105.
106.
Chung MK, Worsley KJ, Robbins S et al (2003) Deformation-based surface morphometry applied to gray matter deformation. NeuroImage 18:198–213PubMedCrossRef
107.
Ashburner J, Friston KJ (2000) Voxel-based morphometry—the methods. NeuroImage 11:805–821PubMedCrossRef
108.
Symms M, Jager H, Schmierer K, Yousry T (2004) A review of structural magnetic resonance neuroimaging. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 75:1235–1244PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
109.
Haacke EM, Mittal S, Wu Z et al (2009) Susceptibility-weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications, part 1. Am J Neuroradiol 30:19–30PubMedCrossRef
110.
Mittal S, Wu Z, Neelavalli J, Haacke EM (2009) Susceptibility-weighted imaging: technical aspects and clinical applications, part 2. Am J Neuroradiol 30:232–252PubMedCrossRef
111.
Muskulus M, Scheenstra AEH, Braakman N et al (2009) Prospects for early detection of Alzheimers disease from serial MR images in transgenic mouse models. Curr Alzheimer Res 6:503–518PubMedCrossRef
112.
113.
Hajnal JV, Bryant DJ, Kasuboski L et al (1992) Use of fluid attenuated inversion recovery (FLAIR) pulse sequences in MRI of the brain. J Comput Assist Tomogr 16:841–844PubMedCrossRef
114.
Jones DK, Cercignani M (2010) Twenty-five pitfalls in the analysis of diffusion MRI data. NMR Biomed 23:803–820PubMedCrossRef
115.
Jones DK, Knosche TR, Turner R (2013) White matter integrity, fiber count, and other fallacies: the do's and don’ts of diffusion MRI. NeuroImage 73:239–254PubMedCrossRef
116.
117.
Crawley AP, Henkelman RM (1987) Errors in T2 estimation using multislice multiple-echo imaging. Magn Reson Med 4:34–47PubMedCrossRef
118.
Hu X, Norris DG (2004) Advances in high-field magnetic resonance imaging. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 6:157–184PubMedCrossRef
119.
Majumdar S, Orphanoudakis SC, Gmitro A et al (1986) Errors in the measurements of T2 using multiple-echo MRI techniques. II. Effects of static field inhomogeneity. Magn Reson Med 3:562–574PubMedCrossRef
120.
Majumdar S, Orphanoudakis SC, Gmitro A et al (1986) Errors in the measurements of T2 using multiple-echo MRI techniques. I. Effects of radiofrequency pulse imperfections. Magn Reson Med 3:397–417PubMedCrossRef
121.
Santyr GE (1993) Magnetization transfer effects in multislice MR imaging. Magn Reson Imaging 11:521–532PubMedCrossRef
122.
Anderson CM, Saloner D, Tsuruda JS et al (1990) Artifacts in maximum-intensity-projection display of MR angiograms. AJR Am J Roentgenol 154:623–629PubMedCrossRef
123.
Vosshenrich R, Reimer P (2002) Artifacts and limitations. In: Arlart IP, Bongartz GM, Marchal G (eds) Magnetic resonance angiography. Springer, Berlin, pp 167–180CrossRef
124.
Drost DJ, Riddle WR, Clarke GD, Group AMT (2002) Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy in the brain: report of AAPM MR Task Group #9. Med Phys 29:2177–2197PubMedCrossRef
125.
Duarte JM, Lei H, Mlynarik V, Gruetter R (2012) The neurochemical profile quantified by in vivo 1H NMR spectroscopy. NeuroImage 61:342–362PubMedCrossRef
126.
Kara F, Braakman N, van Buchem MA et al (2011) Prospects of magnetic resonance spectroscopy in mouse models of Alzheimer’s disease. Curr Med Imaging Rev 7:80–87CrossRef
127.
De Graaf RA (2007) Single volume localization and water suppression. In: In vivo NMR spectroscopy principles and techniques. Chichester, West Sussex, England; Hoboken: Wiley, pp 297–348
128.
Hurd RE (2009) Artifacts and pitfalls in MR spectroscopy. In: Waldman AD, Gillard JH, Barker PB (eds) Clinical MR neuroimaging: physiological and functional techniques. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 30–43CrossRef
129.
Kreis R (2004) Issues of spectral quality in clinical 1H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy and a gallery of artifacts. NMR Biomed 17:361–381PubMedCrossRef
130.
Vanhoutte G, Verhoye M, Van der Linden A (2006) Changing body temperature affects the T 2* signal in the rat brain and reveals hypothalamic activity. Magn Reson Med 55:1006–1012PubMedCrossRef
131.
Friedman L, Glover GH (2006) Report on a multicenter fMRI quality assurance protocol. J Magn Reson Imaging 23:827–839PubMedCrossRef
132.
Price RR, Axel L, Morgan T et al (1990) Quality assurance methods and phantoms for magnetic resonance imaging: report of AAPM nuclear magnetic resonance Task Group No. 1. Med Phys 17:287–295PubMedCrossRef
133.
Davids M, Zöllner FG, Ruttorf M et al (2014) Fully-automated quality assurance in multi-center studies using MRI phantom measurements. Magn Reson Imaging 32:771–780PubMedCrossRef
134.
Weisskoff RM (1996) Simple measurement of scanner stability for functional NMR imaging of activation in the brain. Magn Reson Med 36:643–645PubMedCrossRef
135.
Guilfoyle DN, Gerum SV, Sanchez JL et al (2013) Functional connectivity fMRI in mouse brain at 7T using isoflurane. J Neurosci Methods 214:144–148PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
136.
Glover GH, Mueller BA, Turner JA et al (2012) Function biomedical informatics research network recommendations for prospective multicenter functional MRI studies. J Magn Reson Imaging 36:39–54PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
137.
Glover G (2005) FBIRN Stability phantom QA procedures
138.
Teuho J, Saunavaara V, Teras M (2015) Long-term stability of the MR system of the Philips Ingenuity TF. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Phys 2:A22
139.
Fu L, Fonov V, Pike B, et al. (2006) Automated analysis of multi-site MRI phantom data for the NIHPD project. In Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention—MICCAI 2006: 9th International Conference, Copenhagen, Denmark, October 1–6, 2006 Proceedings, Part II, Eds. Larsen R, Nielsen M, Sporring J. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, pp 144–151
140.
Chen CC, Wan YL, Wai YY, Liu HL (2004) Quality assurance of clinical MRI scanners using ACR MRI phantom: preliminary results. J Digit Imaging 17:279–284PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
141.
O'Callaghan J, Wells J, Richardson S et al (2014) Is your system calibrated? MRI gradient system calibration for pre-clinical, high-resolution imaging. PLoS One 9:e96568PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
142.
Lee YC, Fullerton GD, Baiu C et al (2011) Preclinical multimodality phantom design for quality assurance of tumor size measurement. BMC Med Phys 11:1PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
143.
Price RA, JG. Clark, et al. (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging quality control manual. ACR American College of Radiology
144.
Cheong WF, Prahl SA, Welch AJ (1990) A review of the optical properties of biological tissues. IEEE J Quantum Electron 26:2166–2185CrossRef
145.
Gremse F, Theek B, Kunjachan S et al (2014) Absorption reconstruction improves biodistribution assessment of fluorescent nanoprobes using hybrid fluorescence-mediated tomography. Theranostics 4:960–971PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
146.
Niwa K, Ichino Y, Kumata S et al (2010) Quantum yields and kinetics of the firefly bioluminescence reaction of beetle luciferases. Photochem Photobiol 86:1046–1049PubMedCrossRef
147.
Klose AD, Beattie BJ, Dehghani H et al (2010) In vivo bioluminescence tomography with a blocking-off finite-difference SP3 method and MRI/CT coregistration. Med Phys 37:329–338PubMedCrossRef
148.
Baeten J, Niedre M, Dunham J, Ntziachristos V (2007) Development of fluorescent materials for diffuse fluorescence tomography standards and phantoms. Opt Express 15:8681–8694PubMedCrossRef
149.
Gremse F, Doleschel D, Zafarnia S, et al. (2015) Hybrid microCT-FMT imaging and image analysis. J Vis Exp e52770
150.
Leblond F, Davis SC, Valdes PA, Pogue BW (2010) Pre-clinical whole-body fluorescence imaging: review of instruments, methods and applications. J Photochem Photobiol B 98:77–94PubMedCrossRef
151.
Contag CH, Spilman SD, Contag PR et al (1997) Visualizing gene expression in living mammals using a bioluminescent reporter. Photochem Photobiol 66:523–531PubMedCrossRef
152.
153.
Berger F, Paulmurugan R, Bhaumik S, Gambhir SS (2008) Uptake kinetics and biodistribution of 14C-D-luciferin—a radiolabeled substrate for the firefly luciferase catalyzed bioluminescence reaction: impact on bioluminescence based reporter gene imaging. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 35:2275–2285PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
154.
Aswendt M, Adamczak J, Couillard-Despres S, Hoehn M (2013) Boosting bioluminescence neuroimaging: an optimized protocol for brain studies. PLoS One 8:e55662PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
155.
Lee KH, Byun SS, Paik JY et al (2003) Cell uptake and tissue distribution of radioiodine labelled D-luciferin: implications for luciferase based gene imaging. Nucl Med Commun 24:1003–1009PubMedCrossRef
156.
Ergen C, Heymann F, Al Rawashdeh W et al (2017) Targeting distinct myeloid cell populations in vivo using polymers, liposomes and microbubbles. Biomaterials 114:106–120PubMedCrossRef
157.
Shi Y, Kunjachan S, Wu Z et al (2015) Fluorophore labeling of core-crosslinked polymeric micelles for multimodal in vivo and ex vivo optical imaging. Nanomedicine (London) 10:1111–1125CrossRef
158.
Theek B, Baues M, Ojha T et al (2016) Sonoporation enhances liposome accumulation and penetration in tumors with low EPR. J Control Release 231:77–85PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
159.
Beztsinna N, Tsvetkova Y, Bartneck M et al (2016) Amphiphilic phospholipid-based riboflavin derivatives for tumor targeting nanomedicines. Bioconjug Chem 27:2048–2061PubMedCrossRef
160.
Al Rawashdeh W, Zuo S, Melle A et al (2017) Noninvasive assessment of elimination and retention using CT-FMT and kinetic whole-body modeling. Theranostics 7:1499–1510PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
161.
162.
Chaudhari AJ, Darvas F, Bading JR et al (2005) Hyperspectral and multispectral bioluminescence optical tomography for small animal imaging. Phys Med Biol 50:5421–5441PubMedCrossRef
163.
Vanhove C, Bankstahl JP, Kramer SD et al (2015) Accurate molecular imaging of small animals taking into account animal models, handling, anaesthesia, quality control and imaging system performance. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Phys 2:31
164.
Balaban RS, Hampshire VA (2001) Challenges in small animal noninvasive imaging. ILAR J 42:248–262PubMedCrossRef
165.
Fuchs K, Kukuk D, Reischl G et al (2012) Oxygen breathing affects 3′-deoxy-3′-18F-fluorothymidine uptake in mouse models of arthritis and cancer. J Nucl Med 53:823–830PubMedCrossRef
166.
Hildebrandt IJ, Su H, Weber WA (2008) Anesthesia and other considerations for in vivo imaging of small animals. ILAR J 49:17–26PubMedCrossRef
167.
Gargiulo S, Greco A, Gramanzini M et al (2012) Mice anesthesia, analgesia, and care, part I: anesthetic considerations in preclinical research. ILAR J 53:E55–E69PubMedCrossRef
168.
Gargiulo S, Greco A, Gramanzini M et al (2012) Mice anesthesia, analgesia, and care, part II: anesthetic considerations in preclinical imaging studies. ILAR J 53:E70–E81PubMedCrossRef
169.
Kohn DF (1997) Anesthesia and analgesia in laboratory animals. Academic Press, Cambridge
170.
Flecknell P (2015) Laboratory animal anaesthesia. Elsevier Science
171.
Fueger BJ, Czernin J, Hildebrandt I et al (2006) Impact of animal handling on the results of 18F-FDG PET studies in mice. J Nucl Med 47:999–1006PubMed
172.
Eintrei C, Sakoloff E, Smith CB (1999) Effects of diazepam and ketamine administered individually or in combination on regional rates of glucose utilization in rat brain. Br J Anaesth 82:596–602PubMedCrossRef
173.
Abdel el Motal SM, Sharp GW (1985) Inhibition of glucose-induced insulin release by xylazine. Endocrinology 116:2337–2340PubMedCrossRef
174.
Kohro S, Hogan QH, Nakae Y et al (2001) Anesthetic effects on mitochondrial ATP-sensitive K channel. Anesthesiology 95:1435–1340PubMedCrossRef
175.
Gao YR, Ma Y, Zhang Q et al (2017) Time to wake up: studying neurovascular coupling and brain-wide circuit function in the un-anesthetized animal. NeuroImage 153:382–398PubMedCrossRef
176.
Shah D, Deleye S, Verhoye M et al (2016) Resting-state functional MRI and [18F]-FDG PET demonstrate differences in neuronal activity between commonly used mouse strains. NeuroImage 125:571–577PubMedCrossRef
177.
Wahlsten D, Metten P, Phillips TJ et al (2003) Different data from different labs: lessons from studies of gene-environment interaction. J Neurobiol 54:283–311PubMedCrossRef
178.
Ismail N, Garas P, Blaustein JD (2011) Long-term effects of pubertal stressors on female sexual receptivity and estrogen receptor-alpha expression in CD-1 female mice. Horm Behav 59:565–571PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
179.
Obernier JA, Baldwin RL (2006) Establishing an appropriate period of acclimatization following transportation of laboratory animals. ILAR J 47:364–369PubMedCrossRef
180.
Laroche J, Gasbarro L, Herman JP, Blaustein JD (2009) Enduring influences of peripubertal/adolescent stressors on behavioral response to estradiol and progesterone in adult female mice. Endocrinology 150:3717–3725PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
181.
Laroche J, Gasbarro L, Herman JP, Blaustein JD (2009) Reduced behavioral response to gonadal hormones in mice shipped during the peripubertal/adolescent period. Endocrinology 150:2351–2358PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
182.
Gonder JC, Laber K (2007) A renewed look at laboratory rodent housing and management. ILAR J 48:29–36PubMedCrossRef
183.
Council NR (2011) Guide for the care and use of laboratory animals, 8th edn. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
184.
Baumans V, Van Loo PL (2013) How to improve housing conditions of laboratory animals: the possibilities of environmental refinement. Vet J 195:24–32PubMedCrossRef
185.
Sorge RE, Martin LJ, Isbester KA et al (2014) Olfactory exposure to males, including men, causes stress and related analgesia in rodents. Nat Methods 11:629–632PubMedCrossRef
186.
Bhang H-E, Tsuchiya N, Sysa-Shah P, Winkelmann C T, Gabrielson K (2013) In vivo small animal imaging: a comparison with gross and histopathologic observations in animal models. In: Haschek and Rousseaux’s handbook of toxicologic pathology. Elsevier Inc., Amsterdam, pp 287–315. https://​doi.​org/​10.​1016/​B978-0-12-415759-0.​00009-1
187.
Chen H, Thorne SH (2012) Practical methods for molecular in vivo optical imaging. Curr Protoc Cytom 59:12 24 1–12 24 11
188.
Sevick-Muraca EM, Rasmussen JC (2008) Molecular imaging with optics: primer and case for near-infrared fluorescence techniques in personalized medicine. J Biomed Opt 13:041303PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
189.
Richter SH, Garner JP, Wurbel H (2009) Environmental standardization: cure or cause of poor reproducibility in animal experiments? Nat Methods 6:257–261PubMedCrossRef
190.
Rampon C, Tang YP, Goodhouse J et al (2000) Enrichment induces structural changes and recovery from nonspatial memory deficits in CA1 NMDAR1-knockout mice. Nat Neurosci 3:238–244PubMedCrossRef
191.
Wurbel H (2002) Behavioral phenotyping enhanced—beyond (environmental) standardization. Genes Brain Behav 1:3–8PubMedCrossRef
192.
van der Staay FJ, Steckler T (2002) The fallacy of behavioral phenotyping without standardisation. Genes Brain Behav 1:9–13PubMedCrossRef
193.
Giedd JN, Raznahan A, Mills KL, Lenroot RK (2012) Review: magnetic resonance imaging of male/female differences in human adolescent brain anatomy. Biol Sex Differ 3:19PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
194.
Prendergast BJ, Onishi KG, Zucker I (2014) Female mice liberated for inclusion in neuroscience and biomedical research. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 40:1–5PubMedCrossRef
195.
196.
Mannheim JG, Schlichthaerle T, Kuebler L et al (2016) Comparison of small animal CT contrast agents. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 11:272–284PubMedCrossRef
197.
Mahling M, Fuchs K, Thaiss WM et al (2015) A comparative pO2 probe and [18F]-fluoro-azomycinarabino-furanoside ([18F]FAZA) PET study reveals anesthesia-induced impairment of oxygenation and perfusion in tumor and muscle. PLoS One 10:e0124665PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
198.
Woo SK, Lee TS, Kim KM et al (2008) Anesthesia condition for (18)F-FDG imaging of lung metastasis tumors using small animal PET. Nucl Med Biol 35:143–150PubMedCrossRef
199.
Flores JE, McFarland LM, Vanderbilt A et al (2008) The effects of anesthetic agent and carrier gas on blood glucose and tissue uptake in mice undergoing dynamic FDG-PET imaging: sevoflurane and isoflurane compared in air and in oxygen. Mol Imaging Biol 10:192–200PubMedCrossRef
200.
Chan LW, Hapdey S, English S et al (2006) The influence of tumor oxygenation on (18)F-FDG (fluorine-18 deoxyglucose) uptake: a mouse study using positron emission tomography (PET). Radiat Oncol 1:3PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
201.
Lee KH, Ko BH, Paik JY et al (2005) Effects of anesthetic agents and fasting duration on 18F-FDG biodistribution and insulin levels in tumor-bearing mice. J Nucl Med 46:1531–1536PubMed
202.
Toyama H, Ichise M, Liow JS et al (2004) Evaluation of anesthesia effects on [18F]FDG uptake in mouse brain and heart using small animal PET. Nucl Med Biol 31:251–256PubMedCrossRef
203.
Maier FC, Wehrl HF, Schmid AM et al (2014) Longitudinal PET-MRI reveals beta-amyloid deposition and rCBF dynamics and connects vascular amyloidosis to quantitative loss of perfusion. Nat Med 20:1485–1492PubMedCrossRef
204.
Walker M, Ehrlichmann W, Stahlschmidt A et al (2016) In vivo evaluation of 11C-DASB for quantitative SERT imaging in rats and mice. J Nucl Med 57:115–121PubMedCrossRef
205.
Fischer K, Sossi V, Schmid A et al (2011) Noninvasive nuclear imaging enables the in vivo quantification of striatal dopamine receptor expression and raclopride affinity in mice. J Nucl Med 52:1133–1141PubMedCrossRef
206.
McConville P (2011) Small animal preparation and handling in MRI. Methods Mol Biol 771:89–113PubMedCrossRef
207.
Jonckers E, Delgado y Palacios R, Shah D et al (2014) Different anesthesia regimes modulate the functional connectivity outcome in mice. Magn Reson Med 72:1103–1112PubMedCrossRef
208.
Lahti KM, Ferris CF, Li F et al (1999) Comparison of evoked cortical activity in conscious and propofol-anesthetized rats using functional MRI. Magn Reson Med 41:412–416PubMedCrossRef
209.
Hodkinson DJ, de Groote C, McKie S et al (2012) Differential effects of anaesthesia on the phMRI response to acute ketamine challenge. Br J Med Med Res 2:373–385PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
210.
Haensel JX, Spain A, Martin C (2015) A systematic review of physiological methods in rodent pharmacological MRI studies. Psychopharmacology 232:489–499PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
211.
Grandjean J, Schroeter A, Batata I, Rudin M (2014) Optimization of anesthesia protocol for resting-state fMRI in mice based on differential effects of anesthetics on functional connectivity patterns. NeuroImage 102(Pt 2):838–847PubMedCrossRef
212.
Huang SM, Wu YL, Peng SL et al (2016) Inter-Strain Differences in Default Mode Network: a resting state fMRI study on spontaneously hypertensive rat and Wistar Kyoto rat. Sci Rep 6:21697PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
213.
Chen XJ, Kovacevic N, Lobaugh NJ et al (2006) Neuroanatomical differences between mouse strains as shown by high-resolution 3D MRI. NeuroImage 29:99–105PubMedCrossRef
214.
Schwarcz A, Natt O, Watanabe T et al (2003) Localized proton MRS of cerebral metabolite profiles in different mouse strains. Magn Reson Med 49:822–827PubMedCrossRef
215.
Henckens MJ, van der Marel K, van der Toorn A et al (2015) Stress-induced alterations in large-scale functional networks of the rodent brain. NeuroImage 105:312–322PubMedCrossRef
216.
Liang Z, King J, Zhang N (2014) Neuroplasticity to a single-episode traumatic stress revealed by resting-state fMRI in awake rats. NeuroImage 103:485–491PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
217.
Goelman G, Ilinca R, Zohar I, Weinstock M (2014) Functional connectivity in prenatally stressed rats with and without maternal treatment with ladostigil, a brain-selective monoamine oxidase inhibitor. Eur J Neurosci 40:2734–2743PubMedCrossRef
218.
Thigpen JE, Setchell KD, Kissling GE et al (2013) The estrogenic content of rodent diets, bedding, cages, and water bottles and its effect on bisphenol A studies. J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci 52:130–141PubMedPubMedCentral
219.
Domey J, Teichgraber U, Hilger I (2015) Gold nanoparticles allow detection of early-stage edema in mice via computed tomography imaging. Int J Nanomedicine 10:3803–3814PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
220.
Kunjachan S, Pola R, Gremse F et al (2014) Passive versus active tumor targeting using RGD- and NGR-modified polymeric nanomedicines. Nano Lett 14:972–981PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
221.
Kunjachan S, Gremse F, Theek B et al (2013) Noninvasive optical imaging of nanomedicine biodistribution. ACS Nano 7:252–262PubMedCrossRef
222.
Foster B, Bagci U, Mansoor A et al (2014) A review on segmentation of positron emission tomography images. Comput Biol Med 50:76–96PubMedCrossRef
223.
224.
Baiker M, Milles J, Dijkstra J et al (2010) Atlas-based whole-body segmentation of mice from low-contrast micro-CT data. Med Image Anal 14:723–737PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Standardization of Small Animal Imaging—Current Status and Future Prospects
verfasst von
Julia G. Mannheim
Firat Kara
Janine Doorduin
Kerstin Fuchs
Gerald Reischl
Sayuan Liang
Marleen Verhoye
Felix Gremse
Laura Mezzanotte
Marc C. Huisman
Publikationsdatum
01.10.2018
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Molecular Imaging and Biology / Ausgabe 5/2018
Print ISSN: 1536-1632
Elektronische ISSN: 1860-2002
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11307-017-1126-2

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 5/2018

Molecular Imaging and Biology 5/2018 Zur Ausgabe

Review Article

Imaging Nanomedicine-Based Drug Delivery: a Review of Clinical Studies

Research Article

Image-Based 2D Re-Projection for Attenuation Substitution in PET Neuroimaging

Research Article

Tumor-Specific Zr-89 Immuno-PET Imaging in a Human Bladder Cancer Model

Research Article

Metabolic Brain Network Analysis of Hypothyroidism Symptom Based on [18F]FDG-PET of Rats

Review Article

The Potential of In Vivo Imaging for Optimization of Molecular and Cellular Anti-cancer Immunotherapies

Research Article

Assessment of Remote Myocardium Heterogeneity in Patients with Ventricular Tachycardia Using Texture Analysis of Late Iodine Enhancement (LIE) Cardiac Computed Tomography (cCT) Images

Neu im Fachgebiet Radiologie

18.04.2024 | Pädiatrische Notfallmedizin | Nachrichten

Fünf Dinge, die im Kindernotfall besser zu unterlassen sind

08.04.2024 | Andrologie | Nachrichten

Wie toxische Männlichkeit der Gesundheit von Männern schadet

29.03.2024 | Diagnostische Radiologie | Nachrichten

Studie bestätigt Potenzial von KI in der Radiologie

26.03.2024 | Koronare Herzerkrankung | Nachrichten

Quantitative Angiografie könnte IVUS-Alternative darstellen
weitere anzeigen

Update Radiologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen