ArticleJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism2015
Positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance hybrid scanner imaging of cerebral blood flow using (15)O-water positron emission tomography and arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging in newborn piglets.
Article in Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phase contrast mapping MRI measurements of global cerebral blood flow across different perfusion states - A direct comparison withJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2019Trial
- Preclinical in-vivo cerebrovascular imaging in rodent models: Methods and applications in Alzheimer's disease.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2026Review
- Validation of diffuse correlation spectroscopy againstJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2020Article
- Comparison of simultaneous arterial spin labeling MRI andJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2020Article
- Direct comparison of activation maps during galvanic vestibular stimulation: A hybrid H2[15 O] PET-BOLD MRI activation study.PloS one · 2020Article
- Hybrid PET/MRI imaging in healthy unsedated newborn infants with quantitative rCBF measurements usingJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2019Article
- Multidelay Arterial Spin-Labeling MRI in Neonates and Infants: Cerebral Perfusion Changes during Brain Maturation.AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2018Article
- Test-retest reliability of cerebral blood flow in healthy individuals using arterial spin labeling: Findings from the EMBARC study.Magnetic resonance imaging · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Abnormality in cerebral blood flow (CBF) distribution can lead to hypoxic-ischemic cerebral damage in newborn infants. The aim of the study was to investigate minimally invasive approaches to measure CBF by comparing simultaneous (15)O-water positron emission tomography (PET) and single TI pulsed arterial spin labeling (ASL) magnetic resonance imaging (MR) on a hybrid PET/MR in seven newborn piglets. Positron emission tomography was performed with IV injections of 20 MBq and 100 MBq (15)O-water to confirm CBF reliability at low activity. Cerebral blood flow was quantified using a one-tissue-compartment-model using two input functions: an arterial input function (AIF) or an image-derived input function (IDIF). The mean global CBF (95% CI) PET-AIF, PET-IDIF, and ASL at baseline were 27 (23; 32), 34 (31; 37), and 27 (22; 32) mL/100 g per minute, respectively. At acetazolamide stimulus, PET-AIF, PET-IDIF, and ASL were 64 (55; 74), 76 (70; 83) and 79 (67; 92) mL/100 g per minute, respectively. At baseline, differences between PET-AIF, PET-IDIF, and ASL were 22% (P<0.0001) and -0.7% (P=0.9). At acetazolamide, differences between PET-AIF, PET-IDIF, and ASL were 19% (P=0.001) and 24% (P=0.0003). In conclusion, PET-IDIF overestimated CBF. Injected activity of 20 MBq (15)O-water had acceptable concordance with 100 MBq, without compromising image quality. Single TI ASL was questionable for regional CBF measurements. Global ASL CBF and PET CBF were congruent during baseline but not during hyperperfusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.