4.5 Article

Spinal CSF flow in response to forced thoracic and abdominal respiration

期刊

FLUIDS AND BARRIERS OF THE CNS
卷 16, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12987-019-0130-0

关键词

Flow-sensitive real-time MRI; CSF dynamics; Respiration; Hydrocephalus; Intrathoracic pressure; Intraabdominal pressure

资金

  1. DZHK (German Center for Cardiovascular Research)
  2. [Mrs. L. Grun funds]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Respiration-induced pressure changes represent a powerful driving force of CSF dynamics as previously demonstrated using flow-sensitive real-time magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The purpose of the present study was to elucidate the sensitivity of CSF flow along the spinal canal to forced thoracic versus abdominal respiration. Methods: Eighteen subjects without known illness were studied using real-time phase-contrast flow MRI at 3 T in the aqueduct and along the spinal canal at levels C3, Th1, Th8 and L3. Subjects performed a protocol of forced breathing comprising four cycles of 2.5 s inspiration and 2.5 s expiration. Results: The quantitative results for spinal CSF flow rates and volumes confirm previous findings of an upward movement during forced inspiration and reversed downward flow during subsequent exhalation-for both breathing types. However, the effects were more pronounced for abdominal than for thoracic breathing, in particular at spinal levels Th8 and L3. In general, CSF net flow volumes were very similar for both breathing conditions pointing upwards in all locations. Conclusions: Spinal CSF dynamics are sensitive to varying respiratory performances. The different CSF flow volumes in response to deep thoracic versus abdominal breathing reflect instantaneous adjustments of intrathoracic and intraabdominal pressure, respectively. Real-time MRI access to CSF flow in response to defined respiration patterns will be of clinical importance for patients with disturbed CSF circulation like hydrocephalus, pseudotumor cerebri and others.

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

4.5
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