Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26416649›Full record

ArticleNeuroImage2016

Transcranial functional ultrasound imaging of the brain using microbubble-enhanced ultrasensitive Doppler.

Claudia Errico, Bruno-Félix Osmanski, Sophie Pezet, Olivier Couture, Zsolt Lenkei, Mickael Tanter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in NeuroImage, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Dynamics of cerebral blood volume during and after middle cerebral artery occlusion in rats - Comparison between ultrafast ultrasound and dynamic susceptibility contrast-enhanced MRI measurements.Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Claudia ErricoINSERM, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; ESPCI ParisTech, PSL Research University, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; CNRS, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France.
Bruno-Félix OsmanskiINSERM, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; ESPCI ParisTech, PSL Research University, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; CNRS, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France.
Sophie PezetCNRS, UMR 8249, 10 rue Vauquelin, 75005 Paris, France; Brain Plasticity Unit, ESPCI-ParisTech, PSL Research University 10 rue Vauquelin, 75005 Paris, France.
Olivier CoutureINSERM, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; ESPCI ParisTech, PSL Research University, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; CNRS, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France.
Zsolt LenkeiCNRS, UMR 8249, 10 rue Vauquelin, 75005 Paris, France; Brain Plasticity Unit, ESPCI-ParisTech, PSL Research University 10 rue Vauquelin, 75005 Paris, France.
Mickael TanterINSERM, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; ESPCI ParisTech, PSL Research University, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France; CNRS, Institut Langevin, 1 rue Jussieu, 75005, Paris, France. Electronic address: Mickael.Tanter@espci.fr.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Functional ultrasound (fUS) is a novel neuroimaging technique, based on high-sensitivity ultrafast Doppler imaging of cerebral blood volume, capable of measuring brain activation and connectivity in rodents with high spatiotemporal resolution (100μm, 1ms). However, the skull attenuates acoustic waves, so fUS in rats currently requires craniotomy or a thinned-skull window. Here we propose a non-invasive approach by enhancing the fUS signal with a contrast agent, inert gas microbubbles. Plane-wave illumination of the brain at high frame rate (500Hz compounded sequence with three tilted plane waves, PRF=1500Hz with a 128 element 15MHz linear transducer), yields highly-resolved neurovascular maps. We compared fUS imaging performance through the intact skull bone (transcranial fUS) versus a thinned-skull window in the same animal. First, we show that the vascular network of the adult rat brain can be imaged transcranially only after a bolus intravenous injection of microbubbles, which leads to a 9dB gain in the contrast-to-tissue ratio. Next, we demonstrate that functional increase in the blood volume of the primary sensory cortex after targeted electrical-evoked stimulations of the sciatic nerve is observable transcranially in presence of contrast agents, with high reproducibility (Pearson's coefficient ρ=0.7±0.1, p=0.85). Our work demonstrates that the combination of ultrafast Doppler imaging and injection of contrast agent allows non-invasive functional brain imaging through the intact skull bone in rats. These results should ease non-invasive longitudinal studies in rodents and open a promising perspective for the adoption of highly resolved fUS approaches for the adult human brain.

Indexed as

Contrast MediaMicrobubblesAnimalsBlood VesselsBlood VolumeBrainElectric StimulationEvoked PotentialsImage Processing, Computer-AssistedMaleRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyReproducibility of ResultsSkullSomatosensory CortexUltrasonography, Doppler, TranscranialContrast MediaBlood volumeFunctional ultrasound imagingMicrobubblesPrimary sensory cortexSomatosensory activationTranscranial

Identifiers

PMID26416649
PMCPMC4686564

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.