4.5 Article

Assessment of middle cerebral artery diameter during hypocapnia and hypercapnia in humans using ultra-high-field MRI

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 117, 期 10, 页码 1084-1089

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00651.2014

关键词

transcranial Doppler; MRI; hypocapnia; hypercapnia; angiography; cerebral blood flow measurement

资金

  1. Rembrandt Institute of Cardiovascular Science

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the evaluation of cerebrovascular CO2 reactivity measurements, it is often assumed that the diameter of the large intracranial arteries insonated by transcranial Doppler remains unaffected by changes in arterial CO2 partial pressure. However, the strong cerebral vasodilatory capacity of CO2 challenges this assumption, suggesting that there should be some changes in diameter, even if very small. Data from previous studies on effects of CO2 on cerebral artery diameter [middle cerebral artery (MCA)] have been inconsistent. In this study, we examined 10 healthy subjects (5 women, 5 men, age 21-30 yr). High-resolution (0.2 mm in-plane) MRI scans at 7 Tesla were used for direct observation of the MCA diameter during hypocapnia, -1 kPa (-7.5 mmHg), normocapnia, 0 kPa (0 mmHg), and two levels of hypercapnia, +1 and +2 kPa (7.5 and 15 mmHg), with respect to baseline. The vessel lumen was manually delineated by two independent observers. The results showed that the MCA diameter increased by 6.8 +/- 2.9% in response to 2 kPa end-tidal PCO2 (PETCO2) above baseline. However, no significant changes in diameter were observed at the -1 kPa (-1.2 +/- 2.4%), and -1 kPa (+1.4 +/- 3.2%) levels relative to normocapnia. The nonlinear response of the MCA diameter to CO2 was fitted as a continuous calibration curve. Cerebral blood flow changes measured by transcranial Doppler could be corrected by this calibration curve using concomitant PETCO2 measurements. In conclusion, the MCA diameter remains constant during small deviations of the PETCO2 from normocapnia, but increases at higher PETCO2 values.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据