4.6 Article

Oxygen consumption and blood flow coupling in human motor cortex during intense finger tapping: implication for a role of lactate

期刊

JOURNAL OF CEREBRAL BLOOD FLOW AND METABOLISM
卷 32, 期 10, 页码 1859-1868

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1038/jcbfm.2012.89

关键词

energy metabolism; lactate; positron emission tomography; neurovascular coupling

资金

  1. Danish Medical Research Council [9305246, 9305247, 9601888, 9802833]
  2. National Program for Research Infrastructure grant

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Rates of cerebral blood flow (CBF) and glucose consumption (CMRglc) rise in cerebral cortex during continuous stimulation, while the oxygen-glucose index (OGI) declines as an index of mismatched coupling of oxygen consumption (cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen-CMRO2) to CBF and CMRglc. To test whether the mismatch reflects a specific role of aerobic glycolysis during functional brain activation, we determined CBF and CMRO2 with positron emission tomography (PET) when 12 healthy volunteers executed finger-to-thumb apposition of the right hand. Movements began 1, 10, or 20 minutes before administration of the radiotracers. In primary and supplementary motor cortices and cerebellum, CBF had increased at 1 minute of exercise and remained elevated for the duration of the 20-minute session. In contrast, the CMRO2 numerically had increased insignificantly in left M1 and supplementary motor area at 1 minute, but had declined significantly at 10 minutes, returning to baseline at 20 minutes. As measures of CMRglc are impossible during short-term activations, we used measurements of CBF as indices of CMRglc. The decline of CMRO2 at 10 minutes paralleled a calculated decrease of OGI at this time. The implied generation of lactate in the tissue suggested an important hypothetical role of the metabolite as regulator of CBF during activation. Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism (2012) 32, 1859-1868; doi:10.1038/jcbfm.2012.89; published online 11 July 2012

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

4.6
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