ArticleMagnetic resonance imaging2021
Sensitivity limitations of high-resolution perfusion-based human fMRI at 7 Tesla.
Article in Magnetic resonance imaging, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clustering Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Time Series in Glioblastoma Characterization: A Review of the Evolution, Applications, and Potentials.Brain sciences · 2024Review
- Combining arterial blood contrast with BOLD increases fMRI intracortical contrast.Human brain mapping · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The study of the brain's functional organization at laminar and columnar level of the cortex with blood oxygenation-level dependent (BOLD) functional MRI (fMRI) is affected by the contribution of large veins downstream from the microvascular response to brain activity. Blood volume- and especially perfusion-based techniques may reduce this problem because of their reduced sensitivity to venous effects, but may not allow the same spatial resolution because of smaller signal changes associated with brain activity. Here we investigated the practical resolution limits of perfusion-weighted fMRI in human visual stimulation experiments. For this purpose, we used a highly sensitive, single-shot perfusion labeling (SSPL) technique at 7 T and compared sensitivity to detect visual activation at low (2 mm, n = 10) and high (1 mm, n = 8) nominal isotropic spatial, and 3 s temporal, resolution with BOLD in 5½-minute-long experiments. Despite the smaller absolute signal change with activation, 2 mm resolution SSPL yielded comparable sensitivity to BOLD. This was attributed to a superior suppression of physiological noise with SSPL. However, at 1 mm nominal resolution, SSPL sensitivity fell on average at least 42% below that of BOLD, and detection of visual activation was compromised. This is explained by the fact that at high resolution, with both techniques, typically thermal noise rather than physiological noise dominates sensitivity. The observed sensitivity loss implies that to perform 1-mm resolution, perfusion weighted fMRI with a robustness similar to BOLD, scan times that are almost 3 times longer than the comparable BOLD experiment are required. This is in line with or slightly better than previous comparisons between perfusion-weighted fMRI and BOLD. The lower sensitivity has to be weighed against the spatial fidelity advantages of high-resolution perfusion-weighted fMRI.
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.