Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 133

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Reliable Estimation of Capillary Transit Time Distributions Using DSC-MRI

Mouridsen, Kim, Hansen, Mikkel Bo, Østergaard, Leif, Jespersen, Sune Nørhøj·2014·Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
DOI 10.1038/jcbfm.2014.111
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The regional availability of oxygen in brain tissue is traditionally inferred from the magnitude of cerebral blood flow ( CBF) and the concentration of oxygen in arterial blood. Measurements of CBF are therefore widely used in the localization of neuronal response to stimulation and in the evaluation of patients suspected of acute ischemic stroke or flow-limiting carotid stenosis. It was recently demonstrated that capillary transit time heterogeneity ( CTH) limits maximum oxygen extraction fraction ( OEF max ) that can be achieved for a given CBF. Here we present a statistical approach for determining CTH, mean transit time ( MTT), and CBF using dynamic susceptibility contrast magnetic resonance imaging (DSC-MRI). Using numerical simulations, we demonstrate that CTH, MTT, and OEF max can be estimated with low bias and variance across a wide range of microvascular flow patterns, even at modest signal-to-noise ratios. Mean transit time estimated by singular value decomposition (SVD) deconvolution, however, is confounded by CTH. The proposed technique readily identifies malperfused tissue in acute stroke patients and appears to highlight information not detected by the standard SVD technique. We speculate that this technique permits the non-invasive detection of tissue with impaired oxygen delivery in neurologic disorders such as acute ischemic stroke and Alzheimer's disease during routine diagnostic imaging.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/jcbfm.2014.111

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Lindstrom MJ, 1988, J Am Stat Assoc, 83, 1014
  2. 10.1002/mrm.1910360510 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Vogel J, 1997, Am J Physiol, 272, H1833

Cited by

See all 133

Metadata

Authors
Mouridsen, K., Hansen, M. B., Østergaard, L., & Jespersen, S. N.
Affiliations
Center of Functionally Integrative Neuroscience and MINDLab, Institute of Clinical Medicine, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
Venue
Journal of Cerebral Blood Flow & Metabolism
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2014-06-18
Volume
34
Issue
9
Pages
1511-1521
ISSN
  • 0271-678X
  • 1559-7016
DOI
10.1038/jcbfm.2014.111
Cited by
133
References
39
Language
en
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.