Limits...
Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Liver Metastasis in Orthotopic Nude-Mouse Models.

Murakami T, Hiroshima Y, Zhang Y, Chishima T, Tanaka K, Bouvet M, Endo I, Hoffman RM - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: Post-surgical residual tumor fluorescence was visualized with the OV100 Small Animal Imaging System.Residual tumor fluorescence after BLS was clearly visualized at high magnification with the OV100.In contrast, residual tumor fluorescence after FGS was not detected even at high magnification with the OV100.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: AntiCancer, Inc., San Diego, California, United States of America; Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, United States of America; Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.

ABSTRACT
We report here the development of fluorescence-guided surgery of liver metastasis. HT29 human colon cancer cells expressing green fluorescent protein (GFP) were initially injected in the spleen of nude mice. Three weeks later, established liver metastases were harvested and implanted on the left lobe of the liver in other nude mice in order to make an orthotopic liver metastasis model. Fourteen mice with a single liver metastasis were randomized into bright-light surgery (BLS) or fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) groups. Seven mice were treated with BLS, seven were treated with FGS. Three weeks after implantation, the left lobe of the liver with a single metastasis was exposed through a median abdominal incision. BLS was performed under white light. FGS was performed using a hand-held portable fluorescence imaging system (Dino-Lite). Post-surgical residual tumor fluorescence was visualized with the OV100 Small Animal Imaging System. Residual tumor fluorescence after BLS was clearly visualized at high magnification with the OV100. In contrast, residual tumor fluorescence after FGS was not detected even at high magnification with the OV100. These results demonstrate the feasibility of FGS for liver metastasis.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Evaluation of tumor fluorescence at day 28 after surgery.(A) Upper panel shows the bright field image, and lower panel shows the GFP tumor fluorescence image obtained with the OV100 at a magnification of 0.56. Laparotomy was performed at the 28th postoperative day. Bright field image shows tumor in the resection site in the liver (arrows). Strong GFP fluorescence from the tumor is seen in the lower panel. Arrows show recurrent tumor in the resection site. Arrowheads show operative scar on the liver. (B) The GFP tumor fluorescence area was significantly larger in the BLS group compared to the FGS group, where only autofluorescence was detected. Error bars show SD. *P<0.05.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4591295&req=5

pone.0138752.g007: Evaluation of tumor fluorescence at day 28 after surgery.(A) Upper panel shows the bright field image, and lower panel shows the GFP tumor fluorescence image obtained with the OV100 at a magnification of 0.56. Laparotomy was performed at the 28th postoperative day. Bright field image shows tumor in the resection site in the liver (arrows). Strong GFP fluorescence from the tumor is seen in the lower panel. Arrows show recurrent tumor in the resection site. Arrowheads show operative scar on the liver. (B) The GFP tumor fluorescence area was significantly larger in the BLS group compared to the FGS group, where only autofluorescence was detected. Error bars show SD. *P<0.05.

Mentions: Laparotomy was performed at 28 postoperative day. Recurrent tumor fluorescence was visualized next to the resected site in the liver in the BLS group, but not in the FGS group (Fig 7). In the FGS group, only autofluorescence was detected.


Fluorescence-Guided Surgery of Liver Metastasis in Orthotopic Nude-Mouse Models.

Murakami T, Hiroshima Y, Zhang Y, Chishima T, Tanaka K, Bouvet M, Endo I, Hoffman RM - PLoS ONE (2015)

Evaluation of tumor fluorescence at day 28 after surgery.(A) Upper panel shows the bright field image, and lower panel shows the GFP tumor fluorescence image obtained with the OV100 at a magnification of 0.56. Laparotomy was performed at the 28th postoperative day. Bright field image shows tumor in the resection site in the liver (arrows). Strong GFP fluorescence from the tumor is seen in the lower panel. Arrows show recurrent tumor in the resection site. Arrowheads show operative scar on the liver. (B) The GFP tumor fluorescence area was significantly larger in the BLS group compared to the FGS group, where only autofluorescence was detected. Error bars show SD. *P<0.05.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4591295&req=5

pone.0138752.g007: Evaluation of tumor fluorescence at day 28 after surgery.(A) Upper panel shows the bright field image, and lower panel shows the GFP tumor fluorescence image obtained with the OV100 at a magnification of 0.56. Laparotomy was performed at the 28th postoperative day. Bright field image shows tumor in the resection site in the liver (arrows). Strong GFP fluorescence from the tumor is seen in the lower panel. Arrows show recurrent tumor in the resection site. Arrowheads show operative scar on the liver. (B) The GFP tumor fluorescence area was significantly larger in the BLS group compared to the FGS group, where only autofluorescence was detected. Error bars show SD. *P<0.05.
Mentions: Laparotomy was performed at 28 postoperative day. Recurrent tumor fluorescence was visualized next to the resected site in the liver in the BLS group, but not in the FGS group (Fig 7). In the FGS group, only autofluorescence was detected.

Bottom Line: Post-surgical residual tumor fluorescence was visualized with the OV100 Small Animal Imaging System.Residual tumor fluorescence after BLS was clearly visualized at high magnification with the OV100.In contrast, residual tumor fluorescence after FGS was not detected even at high magnification with the OV100.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: AntiCancer, Inc., San Diego, California, United States of America; Department of Surgery, University of California San Diego, San Diego, California, United States of America; Department of Gastroenterological Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Yokohama City University, Yokohama, Japan.

ABSTRACT
We report here the development of fluorescence-guided surgery of liver metastasis. HT29 human colon cancer cells expressing green fluorescent protein (GFP) were initially injected in the spleen of nude mice. Three weeks later, established liver metastases were harvested and implanted on the left lobe of the liver in other nude mice in order to make an orthotopic liver metastasis model. Fourteen mice with a single liver metastasis were randomized into bright-light surgery (BLS) or fluorescence-guided surgery (FGS) groups. Seven mice were treated with BLS, seven were treated with FGS. Three weeks after implantation, the left lobe of the liver with a single metastasis was exposed through a median abdominal incision. BLS was performed under white light. FGS was performed using a hand-held portable fluorescence imaging system (Dino-Lite). Post-surgical residual tumor fluorescence was visualized with the OV100 Small Animal Imaging System. Residual tumor fluorescence after BLS was clearly visualized at high magnification with the OV100. In contrast, residual tumor fluorescence after FGS was not detected even at high magnification with the OV100. These results demonstrate the feasibility of FGS for liver metastasis.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus