4.7 Article

Somatosensory cortical activation identified by functional MRI in preterm and term infants

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 49, 期 3, 页码 2063-2071

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.10.038

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical Research Council
  2. National Institute of Health Research imperial College Comprehensive Biomedical Research Centre, UK
  3. National institute of Health Research
  4. Medical Research Council [MC_U120081323, MC_U120097117] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. National Institute for Health Research [ACF-2006-21-028, ACF-2006-18-003] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. MRC [MC_U120081323] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Functional MRI (fMRI) has not previously been used systematically to investigate brain function in preterm infants We here describe statistically robust and reproducible fMRI results in this challenging Subject group using a programmable somatosensory stimulus synchronized with MR image acquisition which induced well-localized positive blood oxygen level dependent (BOLD) responses contralateral to the side of the stimulation in: 11 preterm infants (median post menstrual age 33 weeks and 4 days, range 29 + I to 35 + 3); 6 control infants born at term gestational age, and 18 infants born preterm (median gestational age at bit th 30 weeks and 5 days. range 25 + 4 to 36 + 0) but studied at term corrected gestational age. Bilateral signals were identified in 8 of the ex-preterm infants at term age Anatomical confirmation of appropriate activations was provided with diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) based tractography which identified connecting pathways from the regions of activation through the ipsilateral corticospinal tracts and posterior lumb of the internal capsule These results demonstrate that it is possible to reliably identify positive BOLD signals in the infant brain and that fMRI techniques can also be applied in the study of preterm infants Crown Copyright (C) 2009 Published by 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