4.7 Article

Cortical deactivation induced by visual stimulation in human slow-wave sleep

期刊

NEUROIMAGE
卷 17, 期 3, 页码 1325-1335

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1006/nimg.2002.1249

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has previously been demonstrated that sleeping and sedated young children respond with a paradoxical decrease in the blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) signal in the rostro-medial occipital visual cortex during visual stimulation. It is unresolved whether this negative BOLD response pattern is of developmental neurobiological origin particular to a given age or to a general effect of sleep or sedative drugs. To further elucidate this issue, we used fMRI and positron emission tomography (PET) to study the brain activation pattern during visual stimulation in spontaneously sleeping adult volunteers. In five sleeping volunteers SIM studies confirmed a robust signal decrease during stimulation in the rostro-medial occipital cortex. A similar relative decrease at the same location was found during visual stimulation and polysomnographically verified slow-wave sleep in a separate group of six subjects using (H2O)-O-15 PET measures of the regional cerebral blood flow (rCBF). This decrease was more rostro-dorsal compared to the relative rCBF increase along the calcarine sulcus found during visual stimulation in the awake state. This study reconfirms the previously described paradoxical stimulation-correlated negative BOLD signal change in the rostro-medial occipital cortex, expanding this response mode to an age spectrum ranging from the newborn to the adult. Further, the use of complementary brain mapping techniques suggests that this decrease was secondary to a relative rCBF decrease. Possible mechanisms for the paradoxical response pattern during sleep include an active inhibition of the visual cortex or a disruption of an energy-consuming process. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science (USA).

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