| Title |
A novel anesthesia regime enables neurofunctional studies and imaging genetics across mouse strains
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Scientific Reports, April 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1038/srep24523 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Marija M. Petrinovic, Georges Hankov, Aileen Schroeter, Andreas Bruns, Markus Rudin, Markus von Kienlin, Basil Künnecke, Thomas Mueggler |
| Abstract |
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) has revolutionized neuroscience by opening a unique window that allows neurocircuitry function and pathological alterations to be probed non-invasively across brain disorders. Here we report a novel sustainable anesthesia procedure for small animal neuroimaging that overcomes shortcomings of anesthetics commonly used in rodent fMRI. The significantly improved preservation of cerebrovascular dynamics enhances sensitivity to neural activity changes for which it serves as a proxy in fMRI readouts. Excellent cross-species/strain applicability provides coherence among preclinical findings and is expected to improve translation to clinical fMRI investigations. The novel anesthesia procedure based on the GABAergic anesthetic etomidate was extensively validated in fMRI studies conducted in a range of genetically engineered rodent models of autism and strains commonly used for transgenic manipulations. Etomidate proved effective, yielded long-term stable physiology with basal cerebral blood flow of ~0.5 ml/g/min and full recovery. Cerebrovascular responsiveness of up to 180% was maintained as demonstrated with perfusion- and BOLD-based fMRI upon hypercapnic, pharmacological and sensory stimulation. Hence, etomidate lends itself as an anesthetic-of-choice for translational neuroimaging studies across rodent models of brain disorders. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 40% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 20% |
| Ireland | 1 | 20% |
| Unknown | 1 | 20% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 80% |
| Scientists | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 98 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 2% |
| Canada | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 95 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 24 | 24% |
| Researcher | 23 | 23% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 7% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 16% |
| Unknown | 13 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Neuroscience | 31 | 32% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 8 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 8% |
| Psychology | 7 | 7% |
| Engineering | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 20 | 20% |
| Unknown | 18 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 July 2017.
All research outputs
#13,465,597
of 22,862,742 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#61,060
of 123,469 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#146,165
of 299,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#1,509
of 3,008 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,862,742 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 123,469 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.2. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,054 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,008 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.