4.7 Article

Variability of the hemodynamic response as a function of age and frequency of epileptic discharge in children with epilepsy

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 40, 期 2, 页码 601-614

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2007.11.056

关键词

hemodynamic response function; fMRI; spike; age

资金

  1. CIHR [38079-3] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

EEG-fMRI is a non-invasive tool to investigate epileptogenic networks in patients with epilepsy. Different patterns of BOLD responses have been observed in children as compared to adults. A high intra- and intersubject variability of the hemodynamic response function (HRF) to epileptic discharges has been observed in adults. The actual HRF to epileptic discharges in children and its dependence on age are unknown. We analyzed 64 EEG-fMRI event types in 37 children (3 months to 18 years), 92% showing a significant BOLD response. HRFs were calculated for each BOLD cluster using a Fourier basis set. After excluding HRFs with a low signal-to-noise ratio, 126 positive and 98 negative HRFs were analyzed. We evaluated age-dependent changes as well as the effect of increasing numbers of spikes. Peak time, amplitude and signal-to-noise ratio of the HRF and the t-statistic score of the cluster were used as dependent variables. We observed significantly longer peak times of the HRF in the youngest children (0 to 2 years), suggesting that the use of multiple HRFs might be important in this group. A different coupling between neuronal activity and metabolism or blood flow in young children may cause this phenomenon. Even if the t-value increased with frequent spikes, the amplitude of the HRF decreased significantly with spike frequency. This reflects a violation of the assumptions of the General Linear Model and therefore the use of alternative analysis techniques may be more appropriate with high spiking rates, a common situation in children. (C) 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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