henhaobio
Sign in

EBioMedicineBioengineeringPeer-reviewed journal article

PhysiofUS : a tissue-motion based method for heart and breathing rate assessment in neurofunctional ultrasound imaging

Nicolas ZuckeriD, S. Le Meur-DieboltiD, Felipe Cybis PereiraiD, Jérôme BarangeriD, Isabella U. HurvitziD, Charlie DemenéiD, Bruno-Félix OsmanskiiD, Nathalie Ialy-RadioiD, Valérie BiraniD, Olivier BaudiD, Sophie PezetiD, Thomas DeffieuxiD, Mickaël TanteriD

PDFDOIPreprint

Abstract

Recent studies have shown growing evidence that brain function is closely synchronised with global physiological parameters. Heart rate is linked to various cognitive processes and previous research has also demonstrated a strong correlation between neuronal activity and breathing. These findings highlight the significance of monitoring these key physiological parameters during neuroimaging as they provide valuable insights into the overall brain function. Today, in neuroimaging, assessing these parameters required additional cumbersome devices or implanted electrodes. In this work, we performed ultrafast ultrasound imaging both in rodents and human neonates, and we extracted heart and breathing rates from local tissue motion assessed by raw ultrasound data processing. Such PhysiofUS automatically select two specific and optimal brain regions with pulsatile tissue signals to monitor such parameters. We validated the correspondence of these periodic signals with heart and breathing rates assessed using gold-standard electrodes in various conditions in rodents. We also validated Physio-fUS imaging in a clinical environment using conventional ECG. We show the potential of fUS imaging as an integrative tool for simultaneously monitoring physiological parameters during neurofunctional imaging. Beyond the technological improvement, this innovation could enhance our understanding of the link between breathing, heart rate and neurovascular activity both anesthetised in preclinincal research and clinical functional ultrasound imaging.

Citations
9
FWCI
1.95
Field percentile
top 15%

Reproducibility ledger

Nobody has reported trying to reproduce this paper yet. Did you replicate an experiment or run the code? Your report saves the next lab a week.

Sign in to file a reproducibility report.