4.7 Article

Assessment of rodent brain activity using combined [15O]H2O-PET and BOLD-fMRI

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 89, Issue -, Pages 271-279

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.11.044

Keywords

PET; Brain activation; Small animal; fMRI; BOLD

Funding

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG) [PI 771-1/1]
  2. Werner Siemens-Foundation
  3. Wilhelm Schuler-Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The study of brain activation in small animals is of high interest for neurological research. In this study, we proposed a protocol to monitor brain activation in rats following whisker stimulation using the short half-life PET tracer [O-15]H2O as a marker for cerebral blood flow. This technique enables the study of baseline and activation conditions in fast succession within the same scanning session. Furthermore, we compared the results obtained from PET imaging with additional BOLD-fMRI data acquired in the same animals within the same anesthetic session in immediate succession. Although the maximum relative signal changes during brain activity observed with PET were substantially higher compared to the BOLD-fMRI results, statistical analyses showed that the number of activated voxels in PET was lower compared to the fMRI measurements. Furthermore, there was a difference in the activation centers in both the shape and location between PET and fMRI. The discrepancy in the number of activated voxels could be attributed to a lower overall contrast-to-noise ratio of the PET images compared to BOLD-fMRI, whereas the difference in the spatial location indicates a more fundamental process, involving the different physiological origins of the PET and BOLD-fMRI response. This study clearly demonstrates that 1150] H20-PET activation studies may be performed in small laboratory animals, and shows the complementary nature of studying brain activation using [O-15]H2O-PET and fMRI. (C) 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available