4.4 Article

In vivo viscoelastic properties of the brain in normal pressure hydrocephalus

期刊

NMR IN BIOMEDICINE
卷 24, 期 4, 页码 385-392

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/nbm.1602

关键词

MR elastography; brain; viscoelasticity; springpot; normal pressure hydrocephalus

资金

  1. German Research Foundation [Sa/901-3]
  2. Centre for Stroke Research Berlin (BMBF ) [01 EO 0801]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nearly half a century after the first report of normal pressure hydrocephalus (NPH), the pathophysiological cause of the disease still remains unclear. Several theories about the cause and development of NPH emphasize disease-related alterations of the mechanical properties of the brain. MR elastography (MRE) uniquely allows the measurement of viscoelastic constants of the living brain without intervention. In this study, 20 patients (mean age, 69.1 years; nine men, 11 women) with idiopathic (n = 15) and secondary (n = 5) NPH were examined by cerebral multifrequency MRE and compared with 25 healthy volunteers (mean age, 62.1 years; 10 men, 15 women). Viscoelastic constants related to the stiffness (mu) and micromechanical connectivity (alpha) of brain tissue were derived from the dynamics of storage and loss moduli within the experimentally achieved frequency range of 25-62.5 Hz. In patients with NPH, both storage and loss rnoduli decreased, corresponding to a softening of brain tissue of about 20% compared with healthy volunteers (p < 0.001). This loss of rigidity was accompanied by alpha decreasing a parameter (9%, p < 0.001), indicating an alteration in the microstructural connectivity of brain tissue during NPH. This disease-related decrease in viscoelastic constants was even more pronounced in the periventricular region of the brain. The results demonstrate distinct tissue degradation associated with NPH. Further studies are required to investigate the source of mechanical tissue damage as a potential cause of NPH-related ventricular expansions and clinical symptoms. Copyright (C) 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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

4.4
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