These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A comparative evaluation of EPR and OxyLite oximetry using a random sampling of pO(2) in a murine tumor.
    Author: Vikram DS, Bratasz A, Ahmad R, Kuppusamy P.
    Journal: Radiat Res; 2007 Sep; 168(3):308-15. PubMed ID: 17705635.
    Abstract:
    Methods currently available for the measurement of oxygen concentrations (oximetry) in viable tissues differ widely from each other in their methodological basis and applicability. The goal of this study was to compare two novel methods, particulate-based electron paramagnetic resonance (EPR) and OxyLite oximetry, in an experimental tumor model. EPR oximetry uses implantable paramagnetic particulates, whereas OxyLite uses fluorescent probes affixed on a fiber-optic cable. C3H mice were transplanted with radiation-induced fibrosarcoma (RIF-1) tumors in their hind limbs. Lithium phthalocyanine (LiPc) microcrystals were used as EPR probes. The pO(2) measurements were taken from random locations at a depth of approximately 3 mm within the tumor either immediately or 48 h after implantation of LiPc. Both methods revealed significant hypoxia in the tumor. However, there were striking differences between the EPR and OxyLite readings. The differences were attributed to the volume of tissue under examination and the effect of needle invasion at the site of measurement. This study recognizes the unique benefits of EPR oximetry in terms of robustness, repeatability and minimal invasiveness.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]