4.7 Article

Cortical hemodynamic responses induced by low-intensity transcranial ultrasound stimulation of mouse cortex

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 211, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116597

关键词

Transcranial ultrasound stimulation; Motor response; Neural activity; Hemodynamic; LSCI; Multi-parameter

资金

  1. Key Project of Natural Science Foundation of Hebei Province [F2018203256]
  2. Fund for Scientific Instruments of the National Natural Science Foundation of China [61827811]
  3. NIH [R01NS109885]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Ultrasound-mediated neuromodulation is emerging as a key technology for targeted noninvasive brain stimulation, but key insights into its effects and dose-response characteristics are still missing. The purpose of this study is to systematically evaluate the effect of low-intensity transcranial ultrasound stimulation (TUS) on complementary aspects of cerebral hemodynamic. We simultaneously record the EMG signal, local field potential (LFP) and cortical blood flow (CBF) using electrophysiological recording and laser speckle contrast imaging under ultrasound stimulation to simultaneously monitor motor responses, neural activities and hemodynamic changes during the application of low-intensity TUS in mouse motor cortex, using excitation pulses which caused whisker and tail movement. Our experimental results demonstrate interdependent TUS-induced motor, neural activity and hemodynamic responses that peak approximately 0.55s, 1.05s and 2.5s after TUS onset, respectively, and show a linear coupling relationship between their respective varying response amplitudes to repeated stimuli. We also found monotonic dose-response parametric relations of the CBF peak value increase as a function of stimulation intensity and duration, while stimulus duty-cycle had only a weak effect on peak responses. These findings demonstrate that TUS induces a change in cortical hemodynamics and LSCI provide a high temporal resolution view of these changes.

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