4.7 Article

In utero localized diffusion MRI of the embryonic mouse brain microstructure and injury

期刊

JOURNAL OF MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING
卷 42, 期 3, 页码 717-728

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/jmri.24828

关键词

in utero; localized diffusion; MRI; microstructure

资金

  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute (HHMI) International Student Research Fellowship
  2. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [K08 HD073315, NIH R01 NS070909, NIH R01 HD074593]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

PurposeTo develop an in vivo diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (dMRI) technique to study embryonic mouse brain structure and injury. Materials and MethodsPregnant CD-1 mice were examined on embryonic day 17 on an 11.7T scanner. Spatially selective excitation pulses were used to achieve localized imaging of individual mouse brains, in combination with a 3D fast imaging sequence to acquire dMRI at 0.16-0.2 mm isotropic resolution. Subject motions were corrected by navigator echoes and image registration. Further acceleration was achieved by simultaneous imaging of two embryos in an interleaved fashion. We applied this technique to detect embryonic brain injury in a mouse model of intrauterine inflammation. ResultsWith the localized imaging technique, we achieved in utero high-resolution T-2-weighted and dMRI of the embryonic mouse brain for the first time. Early embryonic brain structures were delineated from diffusion tensor images, and major white matter tracts were reconstructed in 3D. Comparison with ex vivo data showed significant changes in the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC), but mostly unchanged fractional anisotropy. In the inflammation-affected embryonic brains, ADC in the cortical regions was reduced at 6 hours after the injury, potentially caused by cellular edema. ConclusionThe feasibility of in utero dMRI of embryonic mouse brains was demonstrated. The technique is important for noninvasive monitoring of embryonic mouse brain microstructure and injury. J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2015;42:717-728.

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

4.7
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