ArticleMedical physics2025
Investigation of neuro-vascular reactivity on fMRI study during visual activation in people with multiple sclerosis using EEG and hypercapnia challenge.
Article in Medical physics, 2025. 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.
- Investigation of neuro-vascular reactivity on fMRI study during visual activation in people with multiple sclerosis using EEG and hypercapnia challenge.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Multimodal Neuroimaging and Electrophysiological Markers in Multiple Sclerosis: An Integrative Review of fMRI, EEG, and EMG Approaches : fMRI, EEG, EMG in Multiple Sclerosis.Galen medical journal · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeople with multiple sclerosis (MS) exhibit a different pattern of blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) activation on functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies when compared to healthy control (HC). PURPOSE: The objective of this study is to determine whether observed differences in BOLD activation between people with MS (pwMS) and HC participants are due to the differences of neurovascular coupling, cerebral blood flow (CBF) or actual neuronal activity.
methodsWe investigated the neuronal activation in pwMS (n = 11) and age- and sex-matched HC participants (n = 15) using simultaneous electroencephalogram (EEG) and fMRI measures during a visual task (VT) and hypercapnia condition.
resultsSignificant neurovascular coupling is observed in both HC and pwMS. Neuro-vascular coupling ratios are not significantly different between groups. However, we observe significantly lower CBF increase during VT and higher quantitative CBF at a rest state in pwMS than in HC (p < 0.05). From the multiple regression model, in HC group, we found that the BOLD contrast change during VT is best predicted by the EEG power change during VT (Student t-score = 2.64, p = 0.022), and the CBF change during hypercapnia (Student t-score = 2.59, p = 0.024). In pwMS, the BOLD contrast change during VT is negatively predicted by the CBF change during VT (Student t-score = -4.02, p = 0.003).
conclusionThese findings could explain that BOLD activation in pwMS is mainly determined by the blood flow change during activation rather than the direct neuronal activation measures or hemodynamic vascular reactivity during hypercapnia challenge, suggesting that altered vasodilatory effects in response to task activation in pwMS might be linked to impaired cerebral hemodynamics, possibly leading to the widely observed abnormal BOLD activation in fMRI studies of pwMS.
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.