Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34876169›Full record

ArticleFluids and barriers of the CNS2021

Quantitative analysis of macroscopic solute transport in the murine brain.

Lori A Ray, Martin Pike, Matthew Simon, Jeffrey J Iliff, Jeffrey J Heys

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Fluids and barriers of the CNS, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 59 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. MR-AIV revealsbioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. A brain-wide solute transport model of the glymphatic system.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2024
    Article
  10. Modeling of brain efflux: Constraints of brain surfaces.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  11. Image-guided subject-specific modeling of glymphatic transport and amyloid deposition.Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Cerebrospinal Fluid Flow.Annual review of fluid mechanics · 2023
    Article
  19. Review
  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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Lori A RayDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Montana State University, Bozeman, USA.
Martin PikeAdvanced Imaging Research Center, Oregon Health and Sciences University, Portland, USA.
Matthew SimonDepartment of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine, Oregon Health and Science University, Portland, USA.
Jeffrey J IliffVISN 20 Mental Illness Research, Education and Clinical Center (MIRECC), VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, USA.
Jeffrey J HeysDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Montana State University, Bozeman, USA. jeffrey.heys@montana.edu.
Montana State University · USAdvanced Imaging Research (United States) · USOregon Health & Science University · USVA Puget Sound Health Care System · US

Funding

national science foundation DMS-1361240
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUnderstanding molecular transport in the brain is critical to care and prevention of neurological disease and injury. A key question is whether transport occurs primarily by diffusion, or also by convection or dispersion. Dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE-MRI) experiments have long reported solute transport in the brain that appears to be faster than diffusion alone, but this transport rate has not been quantified to a physically relevant value that can be compared to known diffusive rates of tracers.

methodsIn this work, DCE-MRI experimental data is analyzed using subject-specific finite-element models to quantify transport in different anatomical regions across the whole mouse brain. The set of regional effective diffusivities ([Formula: see text]), a transport parameter combining all mechanisms of transport, that best represent the experimental data are determined and compared to apparent diffusivity ([Formula: see text]), the known rate of diffusion through brain tissue, to draw conclusions about dominant transport mechanisms in each region.

resultsIn the perivascular regions of major arteries, [Formula: see text] for gadoteridol (550 Da) was over 10,000 times greater than [Formula: see text]. In the brain tissue, constituting interstitial space and the perivascular space of smaller blood vessels, [Formula: see text] was 10-25 times greater than [Formula: see text].

conclusionsThe analysis concludes that convection is present throughout the brain. Convection is dominant in the perivascular space of major surface and branching arteries (Pe > 1000) and significant to large molecules (> 1 kDa) in the combined interstitial space and perivascular space of smaller vessels (not resolved by DCE-MRI). Importantly, this work supports perivascular convection along penetrating blood vessels.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiological TransportBrainConvectionFemaleGlymphatic SystemMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiceMice, Inbred C57BLModels, TheoreticalBiotransportBrain transportDynamic contrast-enhanced MRIGlymphaticInterstitial transportPerivascular transport

Identifiers

PMID34876169
PMCPMC8650464
OpenAlexW4225987206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.