How to translate text using browser tools
1 September 2007 A Comparative Evaluation of EPR and OxyLite Oximetry Using a Random Sampling of pO2 in a Murine Tumor
Deepti S. Vikram, Anna Bratasz, Rizwan Ahmad, Periannan Kuppusamy
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

Vikram, D. S., Bratasz, A., Ahmad, R. and Kuppusamy, P. A Comparative Evaluation of EPR and OxyLite Oximetry Using a Random Sampling of pO2 in a Murine Tumor. Radiat. Res. 168, 308–315 (2007).

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 pO2 measurements were taken from random locations at a depth of ∼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.

Deepti S. Vikram, Anna Bratasz, Rizwan Ahmad, and Periannan Kuppusamy "A Comparative Evaluation of EPR and OxyLite Oximetry Using a Random Sampling of pO2 in a Murine Tumor," Radiation Research 168(3), 308-315, (1 September 2007). https://doi.org/10.1667/RR0854.1
Received: 16 October 2006; Accepted: 1 April 2007; Published: 1 September 2007
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top