4.4 Article

A study paradigm allowing comparison of multiple high-resolution rCBV-maps for the examination of drug effects

期刊

NMR IN BIOMEDICINE
卷 18, 期 4, 页码 260-268

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/nbm.956

关键词

rCBV; rat; rivastigmine; AMI-25; co-registration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Owing to the neuro-vascular coupling, measurement of changes in regional cerebral blood flow and blood volume (rCBV) can be used as surrogates reflecting the effects of central nervous system active drugs on neural transmission. As most such drugs are administered orally or intramuscularly and, in many cases, beneficial effects due to drug treatment can be observed only after chronic administration for days or weeks, the evaluation of drug efficacy requires the development of acquisition and analysis tools that allow for comparison of imaging data sets obtained in multiple sessions and for multiple subjects. In the present study, high-resolution susceptibility contrast MR perfusion imaging using a super-paramagnetic contrast agent (CA) was applied to study the effect of a single oral administration of the acetylcholine-esterase inhibitor rivastigmine (Exelon (R)) on rCBV in rats. rCBV maps were calculated from two T-2-weighted three-dimensional fast-spin-echo scans recorded before and after the injection of the CA, respectively. All MR1 data sets were mapped to a reference data set obtained from a normal male Sprague-Dawley rat using an automated co-registration procedure prior to the analysis for drug effects. Rivastigmine was orally administered at doses of 2, 4 or 8 mg/kg I h prior to the rCBV measurement. Rivastigmine increased rCBV in several brain areas including cortex, caudate putamen and hippocampus. The observed effects were dose-dependent and the changes reached the order of 5-12% as compared with baseline levels. Vehicle-treated animals showed no significant alterations of blood Volume, demonstrating the reproducibility and stability of rCBV measurements. Copyright (c) 2005 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