Method Article

A High-Throughput Image-Guided Stereotactic Neuronavigation and Focused Ultrasound System for Blood-Brain Barrier Opening in Rodents

DOI:

10.3791/61269

⸱

July 16th, 2020

 ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  ,  , 
1Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Pediatric Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, 2Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3Imaging Division, Utrecht University

* These authors contributed equally

In This Article

Summary

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) can be temporarily disrupted with microbubble-mediated focused ultrasound (FUS). Here, we describe a step-by-step protocol for high-throughput BBB opening in vivo using a modular FUS system accessible for non-ultrasound experts.

Abstract

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) has been a major hurdle for the treatment of various brain diseases. Endothelial cells, connected by tight junctions, form a physiological barrier preventing large molecules (>500 Da) from entering the brain tissue. Microbubble-mediated focused ultrasound (FUS) can be used to induce a transient local BBB opening, allowing larger drugs to enter the brain parenchyma.

In addition to large-scale clinical devices for clinical translation, preclinical research for therapy response assessment of drug candidates requires dedicated small animal ultrasound setups for targeted BBB opening. Preferably, these systems allow high-throughput workflows with both high-spatial precision as well as integrated cavitation monitoring, while still being cost effective in both initial investment and running costs.

Here, we present a bioluminescence and X-ray guided stereotactic small animal FUS system that is based on commercially available components and fulfills the aforementioned requirements. A particular emphasis has been placed on a high degree of automation facilitating the challenges typically encountered in high-volume preclinical drug evaluation studies. Examples of these challenges are the need for standardization in order to ensure data reproducibility, reduce intra-group variability, reduce sample size and thus comply with ethical requirements and decrease unnecessary workload. The proposed BBB system has been validated in the scope of BBB opening facilitated drug delivery trials on patient-derived xenograft models of glioblastoma multiforme and diffuse midline glioma.

Introduction

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The blood-brain barrier (BBB) is a major obstacle for drug delivery into the brain parenchyma. Most therapeutic drugs that have been developed do not cross the BBB due to their physicochemical parameters (e.g., lipophilicity, molecular weight, hydrogen bond acceptors and donors) or are not retained due to their affinity for efflux transporters in the brain1,2. The small group of drugs that can cross the BBB are typically small lipophilic molecules, which are only effective in a limited number of brain diseases1,2. As a consequence, for the majority of brain diseases, pharmacological treatment options are limited and new drug delivery strategies are needed3,4.

Therapeutic ultrasound is an emerging technique that can be used for different neurological applications such as BBB disruption (BBBD), neuromodulation, and ablation4,5,6,7. In order to achieve a BBB opening with an extracorporeal ultrasound emitter through the cranium, focused ultrasound (FUS) is combined with microbubbles. Microbubble-mediated FUS results in increased bioavailability of drugs in the brain parenchyma5,8,9. In the presence of sound waves, microbubbles start to oscillate initiating transcytosis and disruption of the tight junctions between the endothelial cells of the BBB, enabling paracellular transport of larger molecules10. Previous studies confirmed the correlation between the intensity of the acoustic emission and the biological impact on the BBB opening11,12,13,14. FUS in combination with microbubbles has already been used in clinical trials for the treatment of glioblastoma using temozolomide or liposomal doxorubicin as the chemotherapeutic agent, or for therapy of Alzheimer’s disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis5,9,15,16.

Since ultrasound mediated BBB opening results in entirely new possibilities for pharmacotherapy, preclinical research for clinical translation is needed to assess the therapy response of selected drug candidates. This typically requires a high-throughput workflow with both high-spatial precision and preferably an integrated cavitation detection for monitoring of targeted BBB opening with a high reproducibility. If possible, these systems need to be cost effective in both initial investment and running costs in order to be scalable according to the study size. Most preclinical FUS systems are combined with MRI for image-guidance and treatment planning15,17,18,19. Although MRI gives detailed information about the tumor anatomy and volume, it is an expensive technique, which is generally performed by trained/skilled operators. In addition, high-resolution MRI may not always be available for researchers in preclinical facilities and requires long scanning times per animal, making it less suitable for high-throughput pharmacological studies. Noteworthy is that, for preclinical research in the field of neuro-oncology, in particular infiltrative tumor models, the possibility to visualize and target the tumor is essential for treatment success20. Currently, this requirement is only fulfilled by MRI or by tumors transduced with a photoprotein, enabling visualization with bioluminescence imaging (BLI) in combination with administration of the photoprotein substrate.

MRI-guided FUS systems often use a water bath to ensure ultrasound wave propagation for transcranial applications, whereby the head of the animal is partly submerged in the water, the so called ‘’bottom-up’’ systems15,17,18. While these designs work generally well in smaller animal studies, they are a compromise between animal preparation times, portability and realistically maintainable hygienic standards during usage. As an alternative to MRI, other guidance methods for stereotactic navigation encompass the use of a rodent anatomical atlas21,22,23, laser pointer assisted visual sighting24, pinhole-assisted mechanical scanning device25, or BLI26. Most of these designs are “top-down” systems in which the transducer is placed on top of the animal’s head, with the animal in a natural position. The ‘’top-down’’ workflow consists either of a water bath22,25,26 or a water-filled cone21,24. The benefit of using a transducer inside a closed cone is the more compact footprint, shorter setup time and straight-forward decontamination possibilities simplifying the entire workflow.

The interaction of the acoustic field with the microbubbles is pressure dependent and ranges from low-amplitude oscillations (referred to as stable cavitation) to transient bubble collapse (referred to as inertial cavitation)27,28. There is an established consensus that ultrasound-BBBD requires an acoustic pressure well above the stable cavitation threshold to achieve successful BBBD, but below the inertial cavitation threshold, which is generally associated with vascular/neuronal damage29. The most common form of monitoring and control is the analysis of the (back-)scattered acoustic signal using passive cavitation detection (PCD), as suggested by McDannold et al.12. PCD relies on the analysis of the Fourier spectra of microbubble emission signals, in which the strength and appearance of stable cavitation hallmarks (harmonics, subharmonics, and ultraharmonics) and inertial cavitation markers (broadband response) can be measured in real-time.

A “one size fits all” PCD-analysis for precise pressure control is complicated due to the polydispersity of the microbubble formulation (the oscillation amplitude depends strongly on the bubble diameter), the differences in bubble shell properties between brands, and the acoustic oscillation, which depends strongly on frequency and pressure30,31,32. As a consequence, many different PCD detection protocols have been suggested, which have been adapted to particular combinations of all these parameters and have been used in various application scenarios (ranging from in vitro experimentation over small animal protocols to PCD for clinical usage) for robust cavitation detection and even for retroactive feedback control of the pressure11,14,30,31,32,33,34,35. The PCD protocol employed in the scope of this study is derived directly from McDannold et al.12 and monitors the harmonic emission for the presence of stable cavitation and broadband noise for inertial cavitation detection.

We have developed an image-guided neuronavigation FUS system for transient opening of the BBB to increase drug delivery into the brain parenchyma. The system is based on commercially available components and can be easily adapted to several different imaging modalities, depending on the available imaging techniques in the animal facility. Since we require a high-throughput workflow, we have opted to use X-ray and BLI for image-guidance and treatment planning. Tumor cells transduced with a photoprotein (e.g., luciferase) are suitable for BLI imaging20. After administration of the photoprotein substrate, tumor cells can be monitored in vivo and tumor growth and location can be determined20,36. BLI is a low-cost imaging modality, it enables to follow the tumor growth over time, it has fast scanning times and it correlates well with tumor growth measured with MRI36,37. We have opted to replace the water bath with a water-filled cone attached to the transducer to enable flexibility to freely move the platform on which the rodent is mounted8,24. The design is based on a detachable platform equipped with integration of (I) small-animal stereotactic platform (II) fiducial markers with both X-ray and optical-image compatibility (III) rapid-detachable anesthesia mask, and (IV) integrated temperature regulated animal heating system. After the initial induction of anesthesia, the animal is mounted in a precise position on the platform where it remains during the entire procedure. Consequently, the entire platform passes all stations of the workflow of the entire intervention, while maintaining an accurate and reproducible positioning and sustained anesthesia. The control software allows the automatic detection of the fiducial markers and automatically registers all types of images and image modalities (i.e., micro-CT, X-ray, BLI and fluorescence imaging) into the frame of reference of the stereotactic platform. With help of an automatic calibration procedure, the focal length of the ultrasound transducer is precisely known within, which enables the automatic fusion of interventional planning, acoustic delivery and follow-up imaging analysis. As shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2, this setup provides a high degree of flexibility to design dedicated experimental workflows and allows interleaved handling of the animal at different stations, which in-turn facilitates high-throughput experiments. We have used this technique for successful drug delivery in mouse xenografts of high-grade glioma such as diffuse midline glioma.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Protocol

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

All in vivo experiments were approved by the Dutch ethical committee (license permit number AVD114002017841) and the Animal Welfare Body of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The investigators were trained in the basics of the FUS system in order to minimize the discomfort of the animals.

1. Focused ultrasound system

NOTE: The described setup is an inhouse built BBB disruption system based on commercially available components and includes a 3D-printed custom-made cone and detachable stereotactic platform. The system is designed modular, which facilitates modifications according to available equipment and specific use. The protocol describes the procedure for the sonoporation of a larger area in the pontine region of the mouse brain. By adjusting the target location, different parts of the brain could be targeted. In this study a 1 MHz mono-element transducer with a focal length of 75 mm, an aperture of 60 mm and a focal area of 1.5 x 1.5 x 5 mm (FWHM of peak pressure) was used. The focal plane of the transducer is positioned through the cranium of the animal in the horizontal plane intersecting with the ear bars.

  1. Select an appropriate transducer for BBB opening in rodents.
    NOTE: Based on the properties of the microbubbles and the employed frequency, the acoustic settings, in particular the mechanical index (MI), are subject to change13,38.
  2. Place the transducer in the 3D-printed cone.
  3. Employ an acoustically transparent mylar membrane at the bottom-end of the cone to achieve acoustic coupling of the beam propagation path, and fill the cone with degassed water.
  4. Mount the transducer above the animal on a motorized linear stage as shown in Figure 1 allowing automatic vertical positioning of the transducer.
  5. Design a detachable stereotactic platform based on the requirements of the study, which includes temperature regulated heating, bite and ear bars, anesthesia and multi-modality fiducial markers, as shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2. The mounting of the stereotactic platform consists of a 2D linear stage system, which allows precise automatic positioning (< 0.1 mm) of the animal under the beam.
  6. Connect the transducer to the acoustic emission chain shown in Figure 1 consisting of a transducer, a function generator and a power amplifier.
  7. Devise an image-processing pipeline to detect the multi-modality fiducial markers that allows precise sonoporation targeting of the brain area of interest and collection of the cavitation data detected by the needle hydrophone.
  8. Calibrate the system and determine the focus point of the transducer in correspondence to vertical positioning of the animal on the stereotactic platform.

2. Animal preparation

NOTE: The following protocol is specified for mice but can be adapted for rats. For these experiments female athymic nude Foxn1-/- mice (6-8 week old) were used.

  1. Allow the animal to acclimatize for at least one week in the animal facility and weigh the animal regularly.
  2. Administer buprenorphine (0.05 mg/kg) via subcutaneous (s.c.) injection 30 min prior to FUS treatment to start analgesic treatment.
  3. Anesthetize the animal with 3% isoflurane, 2 L/min O2 and verify that the animal is deeply anesthetized. Keep the animals anesthetized during the whole procedure and monitor the breathing frequency and heart rate to adjust the concentration of isoflurane as required.
  4. Apply eye ointment to prevent dry eyes and avoid possible injury.
  5. Remove hair on the top of the head with a razor and depilatory cream and wash afterwards with water to remove any residues to avoid irritation to the skin.
  6. For experiments with BLI tumor models, inject 150 µL of D-luciferin (30 mg/mL) intraperitoneal (i.p.) with a 29 G insulin syringe for BLI image-guidance.
  7. Insert a 26-30 G tail vein catheter and flush the catheter and vein with a small volume of heparin solution (5 UI/mL). Fill the catheter with heparin solution to avoid blood clotting.
    NOTE: Good catheterization is seen when there is a reflux of blood into the catheter. Avoid air bubbles in the catheter to prevent emboli. To avoid excessive injection pressure, make sure the length of the catheter is as short as possible.
  8. Place the animal on the temperature regulated stereotactic platform to avoid hypothermia.
    NOTE: Hypothermia reduces blood circulation, which can affect the injection/circulation of microbubbles and the pharmacokinetics of the drugs39.
  9. Immobilize and fix the head of the animal on the stereotactic platform using ear bars and a bite bar. Fixate the body with a strap and tape the tail of the animal to the platform.

3. In vivo image-guided focused ultrasound

NOTE: For this protocol a 1 MHz mono-element transducer with a tone-burst pulse with a 10 ms duration, a MI of 0.4 and a pulse repetition frequency of 1.6 Hz with 40 cycles for 240 s was used. The protocol is optimized for microbubbles stabilized by phospholipids containing sulphur hexafluoride (SF6) as an innocuous gas, whereby the mean bubble diameter is 2.5 μm and more than 90% of the bubbles are smaller than 8 μm.

  1. Place the stereotactic platform with the mounted animal in the imaging modality (e.g., BLI or X-ray) and take image(s) of the animal.
  2. Use the multi-modality fiducial markers in combination with the image-processing pipeline to mark the position of the animal according to the focus point of the transducer.
  3. Determine the target area by placing a brain outline over the acquired X-ray image or using BLI images to determine the center of the tumor (Figure 2). The position of specific parts of the brain are specified in the Paxinos Brain Atlas40 using the skull markings bregma and lambda as reference points. For example the pons is located x=-1.0, y=-0.8 and z=-4.5 from lambda.
  4. Shield the animal’s nostrils and mouth with adhesive tape to prevent ultrasound gel interfering with breathing.
  5. Apply ultrasound gel on top of the animal’s head.
  6. Retract the skin of the animals’ neck, lubricate the needle hydrophone with ultrasound gel and place the needle hydrophone in the direct vicinity of the occipital bone.
  7. Guide the transducer to the correct position using the image-processing pipeline and the focus point.
  8. Apply the preconfigured settings to all attached devices and target the brain region of interest.
    NOTE: Depending on the research question, tumor or brain regions can be sonoporated as a single focal point or as volumetric shape, as shown in Figure 2.
  9. Activate microbubbles as described by the manufacturer. Inject one bolus of 120 µL (5.4 µg) of microbubbles.
  10. Flush the tail vein catheter with saline to check the opening of the catheter.
  11. Inject the microbubbles and start the insonation.
  12. Record microbubble cavitation with the needle hydrophone.
  13. Administer an intravascular contrast agent or drug after sonoporation. The dose, timing and planning are dependent on the purpose of the study and the drug.
    NOTE: Evans blue is a common color agent to assess BBB opening41.
  14. Monitor the animal until the predetermined time point or before the humane endpoint.

4. Analysis of microbubble cavitation

NOTE: Here the applied procedure is described, which is suitable for in vivo experimentation for SF6-phospholipid microbubbles with an average diameter of 2.5 µm (80% of the bubbles below 8 µm) excited with a burst-tone pulse of 10 ms duration at a frequency of 1 MHz, as originally suggested by McDannold et al.12.

  1. Fourier-transform the recorded PCD signal from the time-domain into the frequency domain.
  2. Integrate the resulting spectral power for stable cavitation detection around the 2nd and 3rd harmonic (± 50 kHz), as shown in Figure 3 (green box at 2 and 3 MHz).
  3. Integrate the spectral power for inertial cavitation detection, between principal frequency, the 2nd, 3rd harmonic, the 1st and 2nd ultraharmonic and the first sub-harmonic (± 150 kHz), as shown in Figure 3 (red boxes).
  4. Integrate the spectral power around the principle frequency (1 MHz ± 50 kHz) for the normalization of both previously obtained PCD signals.
    NOTE: The PCD signal, for SF6-phospholipid microbubbles in vivo experiments at 1 MHz, does not display ultraharmonics or subharmonics before inertial cavitation sets in, as shown in Figure 3.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Results

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The described FUS system (Figure 1 and Figure 2) and the associated workflow have been used in over a 100 animals and produced reproducible data on both healthy and tumor bearing mice. Based on the recorded cavitation and the spectral density at the harmonics at the peak moment of the microbubble bolus injection, the spectral power of each frequency can be calculated using the Fourier analysis as explained in step 4 of the Protocol. Based on the acoustic protoco...

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Discussion

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

In this study, we developed a cost-effective image guided based FUS system for transient BBB disruption for increased drug delivery into the brain parenchyma. The system was largely built with commercially available components and in conjunction with X-ray and BLI. The modularity of the proposed design allows the use of several imaging modalities for planning and assessment in high-throughput workflows. The system can be combined with more comprehensive high-resolution 3D imaging modalities, for example high-resolution M...

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Disclosures

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

The authors have nothing to disclose.

Acknowledgements

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,

This project was funded by the KWF-STW (Drug Delivery by Sonoporation in Childhood Diffuse Intrinsic Pontine Glioma and High-grade Glioma). We thank Ilya Skachkov and Charles Mougenot for their input in the development of the system.

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Materials

List of materials used in this article
NameCompanyCatalog NumberComments
1 mL luer-lock syringeBecton Dickinson309628Plastipak
19 G needleTerumo Agani8AN1938R1
23 G needleTerumo Agani8AN2316R1
3M Transpore surgical tapeScience applied to life7000032707or similar
Arbitrary waveform generatorSiglentn.a.SDG1025, 25 MHz, 125 Msa/s
Automated stereotactin-house builtn.a.Stereotact with all elements were in-house built
Bruker In-Vivo XtremeBrukern.a.Includes software
Buffered NaCl solutionB. Braun Melsungen AG220/12257974/110
Buprenorfine hydrochlorideIndivior UK limitdn.a.0.324 mg
Cage enrichment: paper-pulp smart homeBio servicesn.a.
Carbon filterBickfordNC0111395Omnicon f/air
Ceramic spoonn.an.a.
Cotton swabsn.a.n.a.
D-luciferin, potassium saltGold BiotechnologyLUCK-1
EthanolVUmc pharmacyn.a.70%
Evans BlueSigma AldrichE2129
Fresenius NaCl 0.9%Fresenius Kabin.a.NaCl 0.9 %, 1000 mL
HistoacrylBraun Surgicaln.a.Histoacryl 0.5 mL
HydrophonePrecision Acousticsn.a.
Insulin syringeBecton Dickinson324825/3248260.5 mL and 0.3 mL
IsofluraneTEVA Pharmachemie BV8711218013196250 mL
KetamineAlfasann.a.10 %, 10 mL
Mouse food: Teklad global 18% protein rodent dietEnvigo2918-11416M
Neoflon catheterBecton Dickinson39134926 GA 0.6 x 19 mm
OscilloscopeKeysight technologiesn.a.InfiniiVision DSOX024A
Plastic tubesGreiner bio-one21026150 mL
Power amplifierElectronics & Innovation Ltd210LModel 210L
Preamplifier DC CouplerPrecision Acousticsn..Serial number: DCPS94
ScissorsSigma AldrichS3146-1EAor similar
SedazineAST Farman.a.2%
SonoVue microbubblesBraccon.a.8 µl/ml
Sterile waterFresenius Kabin.a.1000 mL
Syringen.a.n.a.various syringes can be used
TemgesicIndivior UK limitdn.a.0.3 mg/ml
TransducerPrecision Acousticsn.a.1 MHz
TweezersSigma AldrichF4142-1EAor similar
Ultrasound gelParker Laboratories Inc.01-02Aquasonic 100
Vidisic gelBausch + Lombn.a.10 g

References

$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$ $$\longleftharp{xx}$$, $$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
  1. Lipinski, C. A. Lead- and drug-like compounds: the rule-of-five revolution. Drug Discovery Today: Technologies. 1 (4), 337-341 (2004).
  2. Pardridge, W. M. Blood-brain barrier delivery. Drug Discovery Today. 12 (1-2), 54-61 (2007).
  3. Alli, S., et al. Brainstem blood brain barrier disruption using focused ultrasound: A demonstration of feasibility and enhanced doxorubicin delivery. Journal of Controlled Release. 281, 29-41 (2018).
  4. Burgess, A., Hynynen, K. Noninvasive and targeted drug delivery to the brain using focused ultrasound. ACS Chemical Neuroscience. 4 (4), 519-526 (2013).
  5. Meng, Y., et al. Safety and efficacy of focused ultrasound induced blood-brain barrier opening, an integrative review of animal and human studies. Journal of Controlled Release. 309, 25-36 (2019).
  6. Darrow, D. P. Focused Ultrasound for Neuromodulation. Neurotherapeutics. 16 (1), 88-99 (2019).
  7. Zhou, Y. F. High intensity focused ultrasound in clinical tumor ablation. World Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2 (1), 8-27 (2011).
  8. O'Reilly, M. A., Hough, O., Hynynen, K. Blood-Brain Barrier Closure Time After Controlled Ultrasound-Induced Opening Is Independent of Opening Volume. Journal of Ultrasound in Medicine. 36 (3), 475-483 (2017).
  9. Mainprize, T., et al. Blood-Brain Barrier Opening in Primary Brain Tumors with Non-invasive MR-Guided Focused Ultrasound: A Clinical Safety and Feasibility Study. Scientific Reports. 9 (1), 321(2019).
  10. Dasgupta, A., et al. Ultrasound-mediated drug delivery to the brain: principles, progress and prospects. Drug Discovery Today: Technologies. 20, 41-48 (2016).
  11. O'Reilly, M. A., Waspe, A. C., Chopra, R., Hynynen, K. MRI-guided disruption of the blood-brain barrier using transcranial focused ultrasound in a rat model. Journal of Visualized Experiments. (61), (2012).
  12. McDannold, N., Vykhodtseva, N., Hynynen, K. Targeted disruption of the blood-brain barrier with focused ultrasound: association with cavitation activity. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 51 (4), 793(2006).
  13. McDannold, N., Vykhodtseva, N., Hynynen, K. Blood-brain barrier disruption induced by focused ultrasound and circulating preformed microbubbles appears to be characterized by the mechanical index. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. 34 (5), 834-840 (2008).
  14. Sun, T., et al. Closed-loop control of targeted ultrasound drug delivery across the blood-brain/tumor barriers in a rat glioma model. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 114 (48), 10281-10290 (2017).
  15. Lipsman, N., et al. Blood-brain barrier opening in Alzheimer's disease using MR-guided focused ultrasound. Nature Communications. 9 (1), 2336(2018).
  16. Carpentier, A., et al. Clinical trial of blood-brain barrier disruption by pulsed ultrasound. Science Translational Medicine. 8 (343), 342(2016).
  17. Chopra, R., Curiel, L., Staruch, R., Morrison, L., Hynynen, K. An MRI-compatible system for focused ultrasound experiments in small animal models. Medical Physics. 36 (5), 1867-1874 (2009).
  18. Kinoshita, M., McDannold, N., Jolesz, F. A., Hynynen, K. Targeted delivery of antibodies through the blood–brain barrier by MRI-guided focused ultrasound. Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications. 340 (4), 1085-1090 (2006).
  19. Larrat, B., et al. MR-guided transcranial brain HIFU in small animal models. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 55 (2), 365(2009).
  20. Contag, C. H., Jenkins, D., Contag, P. R., Negrin, R. S. Use of reporter genes for optical measurements of neoplastic disease in vivo. Neoplasia. 2 (1-2), New York, NY. 41(2000).
  21. Choi, J. J., Pernot, M., Small, S. A., Konofagou, E. E. Noninvasive, transcranial and localized opening of the blood-brain barrier using focused ultrasound in mice. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 33 (1), 95-104 (2007).
  22. Bing, C., et al. Trans-cranial opening of the blood-brain barrier in targeted regions using astereotaxic brain atlas and focused ultrasound energy. Journal of Therapeutic Ultrasound. 2 (1), 13(2014).
  23. Marquet, F., et al. Real-time, transcranial monitoring of safe blood-brain barrier opening in non-human primates. PloS One. 9 (2), (2014).
  24. Anastasiadis, P., et al. characterization and evaluation of a laser-guided focused ultrasound system for preclinical investigations. Biomedical Engineering Online. 18 (1), 36(2019).
  25. Liu, H. L., Pan, C. H., Ting, C. Y., Hsiao, M. J. Opening of the blood-brain barrier by low-frequency (28-kHz) ultrasound: a novel pinhole-assisted mechanical scanning device. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 36 (2), 325-335 (2010).
  26. Zhu, L., et al. Focused ultrasound-enabled brain tumor liquid biopsy. Scientific Reports. 8 (1), 1-9 (2018).
  27. Bader, K. B., Holland, C. K. Gauging the likelihood of stable cavitation from ultrasound contrast agents. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 58 (1), 127(2012).
  28. Neppiras, E. Acoustic cavitation series: part one: Acoustic cavitation: an introduction. Ultrasonics. 22 (1), 25-28 (1984).
  29. Aryal, M., Arvanitis, C. D., Alexander, P. M., McDannold, N. Ultrasound-mediated blood-brain barrier disruption for targeted drug delivery in the central nervous system. Advanced Drug Delivery Reviews. 72, 94-109 (2014).
  30. Tung, Y. S., Choi, J. J., Baseri, B., Konofagou, E. E. Identifying the inertial cavitation threshold and skull effects in a vessel phantom using focused ultrasound and microbubbles. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 36 (5), 840-852 (2010).
  31. Arvanitis, C. D., Livingstone, M. S., Vykhodtseva, N., McDannold, N. Controlled ultrasound-induced blood-brain barrier disruption using passive acoustic emissions monitoring. PloS One. 7 (9), (2012).
  32. Tsai, C. H., Zhang, J. W., Liao, Y. Y., Liu, H. L. Real-time monitoring of focused ultrasound blood-brain barrier opening via subharmonic acoustic emission detection: implementation of confocal dual-frequency piezoelectric transducers. Physics in Medicine & Biology. 61 (7), 2926(2016).
  33. Chen, W. S., Brayman, A. A., Matula, T. J., Crum, L. A. Inertial cavitation dose and hemolysis produced in vitro with or without Optison. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 29 (5), 725-737 (2003).
  34. Qiu, Y., et al. The correlation between acoustic cavitation and sonoporation involved in ultrasound-mediated DNA transfection with polyethylenimine (PEI) in vitro. Journal of Controlled Release. 145 (1), 40-48 (2010).
  35. Sun, T., Jia, N., Zhang, D., Xu, D. Ambient pressure dependence of the ultra-harmonic response from contrast microbubbles. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 131 (6), 4358-4364 (2012).
  36. Rehemtulla, A., et al. Rapid and quantitative assessment of cancer treatment response using in vivo bioluminescence imaging. Neoplasia. 2 (6), 491-495 (2000).
  37. Puaux, A. L., et al. A comparison of imaging techniques to monitor tumor growth and cancer progression in living animals. International Journal of Molecular Imaging. 2011, (2011).
  38. Wu, S. K., et al. Characterization of different microbubbles in assisting focused ultrasound-induced blood-brain barrier opening. Scientific Reports. 7, 46689(2017).
  39. van den Broek, M. P., Groenendaal, F., Egberts, A. C., Rademaker, C. M. Effects of hypothermia on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Clinical Pharmacokinetics. 49 (5), 277-294 (2010).
  40. Paxinos, G., Franklin, K. B. Paxinos and Franklin's the mouse brain in stereotaxic coordinates. , Academic press. (2019).
  41. Saunders, N. R., Dziegielewska, K. M., Møllgård, K., Habgood, M. D. Markers for blood-brain barrier integrity: how appropriate is Evans blue in the twenty-first century and what are the alternatives. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 385, 385(2015).
  42. Yao, L., Xue, X., Yu, P., Ni, Y., Chen, F. Evans blue dye: a revisit of its applications in biomedicine. Contrast Media & Molecular Imaging. 2018, (2018).
  43. Caretti, V., et al. Monitoring of tumor growth and post-irradiation recurrence in a diffuse intrinsic pontine glioma mouse model. Brain Pathology. 21 (4), 441-451 (2011).
  44. Yoshimura, J., Onda, K., Tanaka, R., Takahashi, H. Clinicopathological study of diffuse type brainstem gliomas: analysis of 40 autopsy cases. Neurologia Medico-Chirurgica. 43 (8), 375-382 (2003).
  45. Yang, F. Y., et al. Micro-SPECT/CT-based pharmacokinetic analysis of 99mTc-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid in rats with blood-brain barrier disruption induced by focused ultrasound. Journal of Nuclear Medicine. 52 (3), 478-484 (2011).
  46. Sirsi, S., Borden, M. Microbubble compositions, properties and biomedical applications. Bubble Science, Engineering & Technology. 1 (1-2), 3-17 (2009).
  47. Greis, C. Technology overview: SonoVue. European Radiology. 14, Bracco, Milan. 11-15 (2004).
  48. Schneider, M. Characteristics of sonovue. Echocardiography. 16, 743-746 (1999).
  49. Talu, E., Powell, R. L., Longo, M. L., Dayton, P. A. Needle size and injection rate impact microbubble contrast agent population. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 34 (7), 1182-1185 (2008).
  50. Pinton, G., et al. Attenuation, scattering, and absorption of ultrasound in the skull bone. Medical Physics. 39 (1), 299-307 (2012).
  51. Constantinides, C., Mean, R., Janssen, B. J. Effects of isoflurane anesthesia on the cardiovascular function of the C57BL/6 mouse. ILAR journal/National Research Council, Institute of Laboratory Animal Resources. 52, 21(2011).
  52. McDannold, N., Zhang, Y., Vykhodtseva, N. The effects of oxygen on ultrasound-induced blood-brain barrier disruption in mice. Ultrasound in Medicine & Biology. 43 (2), 469-475 (2017).
  53. McDannold, N., Zhang, Y., Vykhodtseva, N. Blood-brain barrier disruption and vascular damage induced by ultrasound bursts combined with microbubbles can be influenced by choice of anesthesia protocol. Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology. 37 (8), 1259-1270 (2011).

Access restricted. Please log in or start a trial to view this content.

Reprints and Permissions

Request permission to reuse the text or figures of this JoVE article

Request Permission

Tags

Focused UltrasoundBlood Brain BarrierStereotactic NavigationMicrobubble CavitationHigh Throughput SystemImage Guided TargetingPreclinical Drug EvaluationRodent ModelsGlioblastoma TreatmentAutomated Workflow

Related Articles