Water Exchange across the Blood‐Brain Barrier in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: An MRI Diffusion‐Weighted Pseudo‐Continuous Arterial Spin Labeling Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) subjects show brain injury in sites that control autonomic, cognitive, and mood functions that are deficient in the condition. The processes contributing to injury may include altered blood-brain barrier (BBB) actions. Our aim was to examine BBB function, based on diffusion-weighted pseudo-continuous arterial spin labeling (DW-pCASL) procedures, in OSA compared to controls. METHODS: We performed DW-pCASL imaging in nine OSA and nine controls on a 3.0-Tesla MRI scanner. Global mean gray and white matter arterial transient time (ATT, an index of large artery integrity), water exchange rate across the BBB (Kw, BBB function), DW-pCASL ratio, and cerebral blood flow (CBF) values were compared between OSA and control subjects. RESULTS: Global mean gray and white matter ATT (OSA vs. controls; gray matter, 1.691 ± .120 vs. 1.658 ± .109 second, P = .49; white matter, 1.700 ± .115 vs. 1.650 ± .114 second, P = .44), and CBF values (gray matter, 57.4 ± 15.8 vs. 58.2 ± 10.7 ml/100 g/min, P = .67; white matter, 24.2 ± 7.0 vs. 24.6 ± 6.7 ml/100 g/min, P = .91) did not differ significantly, but global gray and white matter Kw (gray matter, 158.0 ± 28.9 vs. 220.8 ± 40.6 min(-1) , P = .002; white matter, 177.5 ± 57.2 vs. 261.1 ± 51.0 min(-1) , P = .006), and DW-pCASL ratio (gray matter, .727 ± .076 vs. .823 ± .069, P = .011; white matter, .722 ± .144 vs. .888 ± .100, P = .004) values were significantly reduced in OSA over controls. CONCLUSIONS: OSA subjects show compromised BBB function, but intact large artery integrity. The BBB alterations may introduce neural damage contributing to abnormal functions in OSA, and suggest a need to repair BBB function with strategies commonly used in other fields.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".