Mary Neal1, Helena Sexton1, Eric Hughes1, and Pete Thelwall1
1Newcastle Magnetic Resonance Centre, Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom
Synopsis
A primary characteristic
of 19F-MRI of pulmonary ventilation is the short in vivo T2*
of the inhaled imaging agent caused by the inhomogeneous magnetic environment proximal
to the alveolar walls. This study describes two novel methods for fabrication
of phantoms that mimic the physical and magnetic properties of alveolar tissue.
In both cases the perfluorinated gas phase imaging agent is suspended in a
stable microporous foam medium. The fabrication techniques permitted precise
control of either bubble size or gas/liquid ratio. Highly monodisperse stable foams
were formed with a perfluoropropane T2* of 2ms, comparable to that
measured in the human lung.
Introduction
19F-MRI of pulmonary ventilation
utilises an inhaled imaging agent such as a 79%:21% perfluoropropane/oxygen gas
mixture (PFP/O2).1,2 The pulmonary alveolar structure produces
magnetic susceptibility gradients between the diamagnetic parenchyma and the
paramagnetic oxygen in inhaled PFP/O2. This reduces the PFP T2*
from 12ms in a magnetically homogeneous environment to T2* = 2.2 ms
in the human lung.3 A lung-representative phantom that reflects the
magnetic environment of human alveoli would permit directly translatable acquisition
development without necessitating human subjects. Literature on the subject is
scarce, with sponge-based phantoms being most widely used.4,5
However, due to limitations with sourcing standardised materials, control over physical
and magnetic properties is minimal. The purpose of this study was to develop stable
microporous foams of known pore size, susceptibility gradients, and gas/liquid
ratio, that exhibit a PFP T2* close to that measured in the human
lung. Two novel foam fabrication methods are presented, yielding monodisperse
(uniform bubble diameter) and polydisperse (heterogeneous bubble diameter)
phantoms.Methods
Monodisperse
foams were produced by mixing an aqueous detergent solution with PFP/O2
gas mixture in a 200 μm diameter T-junction microfluidic chip (Dolomite, UK).
The detergent solution comprised 2 wt% PEG-40 stearate and 1 wt% low melting
point agarose in water. Gas pressure and detergent solution flow rate were
varied to alter foam bubble size and water content, and the resultant foam was
collected in a chilled vial to allow agarose gelling, providing foam structural
stability. Figure 1 shows a schematic of the foam production apparatus.
Polydisperse
foams were produced by mixing an aqueous solution of ovalbumin, citric acid and
triethyl citrate (Dr Oetker egg white powder) in a 1:4 ratio with PFP/O2
gas, and repeatedly passing the mixture through a ~1 mm diameter tube to form a
homogeneous foam.
Physical and
magnetic properties of both foam types were assessed. Foam bubble diameter was
measured by photomicrography from 100 bubbles per sample, and intra- and
inter-sample variability determined. The magnetic susceptibility of the liquid
and gas components of the foams were measured on a susceptibility balance
(Sherwood Scientific, UK). Perfluoropropane –CF3 T1, T2
and T2* were measured using a 2.5 cm diameter 19F
solenoid coil interfaced to a Philips 3.0 T scanner. Photomicrography was
repeated 1 hour after fabrication (after the MR acquisitions) in order to
identify change in bubble size as a measure of foam stability.Results
The liquid components
of both foam types were found to have a magnetic susceptibility equal to that
of water. Figure 2 shows photomicrographs of monodisperse foam with two
distinct bubble sizes (mean diameters = 246±20 μm and 138±22 μm respectively), and
a photomicrograph of polydisperse foam (mean diameter = 29±12 μm). No
significant change in bubble size was measured in any of the samples after one
hour. The water content of the three foams was 30%, 58% and 20% respectively,
and the corresponding perfluoropropane –CF
3 T
2* was 3.3±0.5 ms,
2.0±0.1 ms and 4.0±0.2 ms respectively.
A summary of
the physical and relaxation properties measured is listed in Table 1.
Discussion
The
monodisperse foam fabrication method produced a highly stable foam with lifetime
considerably longer than the duration of MR experiments. The bubble sizes formed
were similar in size to human alveoli, with PFP T2* representative
of in vivo values and increased with bubble size, reflecting the reduced
influence of the susceptibility gradients. Fine control of gas/liquid ratio was
possible only for polydisperse foams, which provided an economical and fast fabrication
process. Although only tested with PFP, it is expected that these phantoms will
be equally valuable for protocol development on other perfluorinated imaging
agents and thermally polarised 129Xe.Conclusion
Two
lung-representative phantom fabrication techniques were described. Both reflect
physical characteristics of human pulmonary alveoli and provide novel tools for
the development of quantitative MR imaging of pulmonary ventilation.Acknowledgements
References
1: Halaweish,
A.F. and Charles, H.C. (2014) 'Physiorack: An integrated MRI safe/conditional,
Gas delivery, respiratory gating, and subject monitoring solution for
structural and functional assessments of pulmonary function', Journal of
Magnetic Resonance Imaging, 39(3), pp. 735- 741.
2:
Gutberlet, M., Kaireit, T.F., Voskrebenzev, A., et al. (2017)
‘Free-breathing dynamic 19F gas MR imaging for mapping of regional
lung ventilation in patients with COPD’, Radiology,
0(0) pp. 1-12.
3: Couch,
M.J., Ball, I.K., Li, T., et al. (2013) 'Pulmonary ultrashort echo time F-19 MR
imaging with inhaled fluorinated gas mixtures in healthy volunteers:
Feasibility', Radiology, 269(3), pp. 903-909.
4: Menke, J.,
Helms, G. and Larsen, J. (2010) 'Viewing the effective k-space coverage of MR
images: phantom experiments with fast Fourier transform', Magnetic Resonance
Imaging, 28(1), pp. 87-94.
5: Molinari,
F., Madhuranthakam, A.J., Lenkinski, R., et al. (2014) 'Ultrashort echo time
MRI of pulmonary water content: assessment in a sponge phantom at 1.5 and 3.0
Tesla', Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, 20(1), pp. 34-41.