4.7 Article

Calibrated BOLD using direct measurement of changes in venous oxygenation

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 63, 期 3, 页码 1178-1187

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.08.045

关键词

BOLD calibration; Hyperoxia; fMRI; CMRO2; Blood oxygenation

资金

  1. Medical Research Council
  2. EPSRC
  3. EPSRC [EP/I026924/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  4. MRC [G0901321] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/I026924/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  6. Medical Research Council [G0901321] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Calibration of the BOLD signal is potentially of great value in providing a closer measure of the underlying changes in brain function related to neuronal activity than the BOLD signal alone, but current approaches rely on an assumed relationship between cerebral blood volume (CBV) and cerebral blood flow (CBF). This is poorly characterised in humans and does not reflect the predominantly venous nature of BOLD contrast, whilst this relationship may vary across brain regions and depend on the structure of the local vascular bed. This work demonstrates a new approach to BOLD calibration which does not require an assumption about the relationship between cerebral blood volume and cerebral blood flow. This method involves repeating the same stimulus both at normoxia and hyperoxia, using hyperoxic BOLD contrast to estimate the relative changes in venous blood oxygenation and venous CBV. To do this the effect of hyperoxia on venous blood oxygenation has to be calculated, which requires an estimate of basal oxygen extraction fraction, and this can be estimated from the phase as an alternative to using a literature estimate. Additional measurement of the relative change in CBF, combined with the blood oxygenation change can be used to calculate the relative change in CMRO2 due to the stimulus. CMRO2 changes of 18 +/- 8% in response to a motor task were measured without requiring the assumption of a CBV/CBF coupling relationship, and are in agreement with previous approaches. (C) 2012 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