4.5 Article

A Contrast-Enhanced Ultrasonographic Study About the Impact of Long-term Exercise Training on Mammary Tumor Vascularization

期刊

JOURNAL OF ULTRASOUND IN MEDICINE
卷 36, 期 12, 页码 2459-2466

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jum.14287

关键词

breast ultrasound; contrast-enhanced ultrasonography; exercise training; mammary cancer; pulsed Doppler ultrasonography; rat

资金

  1. European investment funds from FEDER/COMPETE/POCI
  2. Operational Competitiveness and Internationalization Program [POCI-01-0145-FEDER 006958, POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016728]
  3. Portuguese Science and Technology Foundation [UID/AGR/04033/2013, PTDC/DES/114122/2009, PTDC/DTP-DES/6077/2014, SFRH/BD/102099/2014]
  4. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/102099/2014, PTDC/DES/114122/2009] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

ObjectivesThis study aimed to evaluate the impact of long-term exercise training on the vascularization of rat mammary tumors. MethodsFemale rats were divided into 4 groups: N-methyl-N-nitrosourea (MNU) treated sedentary, MNU treated exercised, control sedentary, and control exercised. Tumor development was induced in the MNU groups by MNU administration. Exercised groups were trained for 35 weeks. Tumor vascularization was evaluated by pulsed Doppler and contrast-enhanced ultrasonography. ResultsThe pulsatility and resistive indices were slightly higher in the MNU sedentary group (P>.05). Mammary tumors mainly had centripetal and heterogeneous enhancement of the contrast, clear margins, and the presence of penetrating vessels. The MNU exercised group had a lower arrival time and time to peak and higher peak intensity, wash-in, and wash-out (P>.05). The area under the curve was similar between groups (P>.05). ConclusionsThe contrast-enhanced ultrasonographic study did not detect differences in mammary tumor vascularization between MNU sedentary and MNU exercised groups previously detected by power Doppler imaging, B-flow imaging, and immunohistochemistry.

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