Detecting static and dynamic differences between eyes-closed and eyes-open resting states using ASL and BOLD fMRI.-猫眼课题宝

DOI：

10.1371/journal.pone.0121757

发表时间：

2015

期刊：

PloS one

影响因子：

3.7

通讯作者：

中科院分区：

综合性期刊3区

文献类型：

作者：

Zou Q;Yuan BK;Gu H;Liu D;Wang DJ;Gao JH;Yang Y;Zang YF

来源链接：

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4376626/?report=classic

静息状态fMRI研究越来越多地集中于多对比技术，如BOLD和ASL成像。然而，这些技术可能揭示了大脑活动的不同方面（例如，静态与动态），并且对于这些技术在检测静息状态大脑活动方面的相似性或差异性知之甚少。因此，评估这些功能磁共振成像技术的静态和动态特性以指导未来的应用是很重要的。在这里，我们在两个研究中心（NIDA和HNU）使用ASL和BOLD技术获取受试者在闭眼（EC）和睁眼（EO）状态下的功能磁共振成像数据。静态脑活动通过使用ASL计算体素平均脑血流量（CBF），即CBF均值，而动态脑活动通过BOLD的低频波动幅度（ALFF）测量，即NIDA和HNU时的BOLD-ALFF，以及NIDA时的CBF，即CBF-ALFF。我们发现，EC下初级视觉皮层的平均CBF低于EO，而延伸至初级听觉皮层的初级体感觉皮层的BOLD-ALFF在EC下较高，枕侧区较低。有趣的是，平均CBF和BOLD-ALFF结果在视觉皮层重叠的程度非常小。重要的是，这些发现在很大程度上被HNU的数据集复制了。CBF-ALFF发现的状态差异位于初级听觉皮层，通常是BOLD-ALFF的一个子集，与CBF-mean没有空间重叠。总之，通过平均脑血流测量的静态脑活动和通过BOLD-和CBF- alff测量的动态脑活动可以反映静息状态脑活动的不同方面，ASL和BOLD的结合可以提供关于大脑生物物理和生理过程的补充信息。

Resting-state fMRI studies have increasingly focused on multi-contrast techniques, such as BOLD and ASL imaging. However, these techniques may reveal different aspects of brain activity (e.g., static vs. dynamic), and little is known about the similarity or disparity of these techniques in detecting resting-state brain activity. It is therefore important to assess the static and dynamic characteristics of these fMRI techniques to guide future applications. Here we acquired fMRI data while subjects were in eyes-closed (EC) and eyes-open (EO) states, using both ASL and BOLD techniques, at two research centers (NIDA and HNU). Static brain activity was calculated as voxel-wise mean cerebral blood flow (CBF) using ASL, i.e., CBF-mean, while dynamic activity was measured by the amplitude of low frequency fluctuations (ALFF) of BOLD, i.e., BOLD-ALFF, at both NIDA and HNU, and CBF, i.e., CBF-ALFF, at NIDA. We showed that mean CBF was lower under EC than EO in the primary visual cortex, while BOLD-ALFF was higher under EC in the primary somatosensory cortices extending to the primary auditory cortices and lower in the lateral occipital area. Interestingly, mean CBF and BOLD-ALFF results overlapped at the visual cortex to a very small degree. Importantly, these findings were largely replicated by the HNU dataset. State differences found by CBF-ALFF were located in the primary auditory cortices, which were generally a subset of BOLD-ALFF and showed no spatial overlap with CBF-mean. In conclusion, static brain activity measured by mean CBF and dynamic brain activity measured by BOLD- and CBF-ALFF may reflect different aspects of resting-state brain activity and a combination of ASL and BOLD may provide complementary information on the biophysical and physiological processes of the brain.