We present the results of new and previously published
17O NMR, EPR, and NMRD studies of aqueous
solutions of the Gd3+ octaaqua ion and the commercial MRI
contrast agents
[Gd(DTPA)(H2O)]2-
(MAGNEVIST,
Schering AG, DTPA =
1,1,4,7,7-pentakis(carboxymethyl)-1,4,7-triazaheptane),
[Gd(DTPA-BMA)(H2O)] (OMNISCAN, Sanofi Nycomed, DTPA-BMA =
1,7-bis[(N-methylcarbamoyl)methyl]-1,4,7-tris(carboxymethyl)-1,4,7-triazaheptane), and
[Gd(DOTA)(H2O)]- (DOTAREM,
Guerbet, DOTA =
1,4,7,10-tetrakis(carboxymethyl)-1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane). High-field EPR measurements at different
concentrations give evidence of an intermolecular
dipole−dipole electronic relaxation mechanism that has not previously
been described for Gd3+ complexes. For
the
first time, the experimental data from the three techniques for each
complex have been treated using a self-consistent
theoretical model in a simultaneous multiple parameter least-squares
fitting procedure. The lower quality of the fits
compared to separate fits of the data for each of the three techniques
shows that the increase in the number of
adjustable parameters is outweighed by the increased constraint on the
fits. The parameters governing the relaxivity
of the complexes are thus determined with greater confidence than
previously possible. The same approach was
used to study two dimeric Gd3+ complexes
[pip{Gd(DO3A)(H2O)}2] and
[bisoxa{Gd(DO3A)(H2O)}2]
(pip(DO3A)2
=
bis(1,4-(1-(carboxymethyl)-1,4,7,10-tetraaza-4,7,10-tris(carboxymethyl)-1-cyclododecyl-1,4-diazacyclohexane,
bisoxa(DO3A)2 =
bis(1,4-(1-(carboxymethyl)-1,4,7,10-tetraaza-4,7,10-tris(carboxymethyl)-1-cyclododecyl))-1,10-diaza-3,6-dioxadecane) that are being developed as potential second-generation
MRI contrast agents. These dimeric
complexes are expected to have higher relaxivities than the monomeric
contrast agents, due to their longer rotational
correlation times. The results of this study show that further
relaxivity gain for these complexes will be hindered by
the slow rate of water exchange on the complexes. High-field EPR
measurements suggest that there is a previously
unrecorded intramolecular dipole−dipole mechanism of electronic
relaxation, but that this additional contribution to
electronic relaxation is of minor importance compared to the limiting
effect of water exchange rates in the determination
of proton relaxivity in MRI applications.