Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

ASL-assessed patients’ and controls’ demographic data and cause of injury.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Diagram of the ASL analysis workflow.

T2 images were skull-stripped and normalized to the ICBM T1-weighted template. A transformation matrix was applied to skull-stripped rCBF images with SPM8, to bring them into the same template. ROIs were selected automatically in the lobes and in deep brain structures using the Wake Forest University (WFU) PickAtlas.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

Major veins selected for susceptibility analysis.

1) Left spetal vein; 2) right septal vein; 3) central septal veins; 4) left thalamostriate vein; 5) right thalamostriate vein; 6) internal cerebral vein; 7) left basal vein of Rosenthal; and 8) right basal vein of Rosenthal.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Mean susceptibility values and standard error in major veins.

* indicates statistically significant difference between controls and acute visit; † indicates statistically significant difference between acute visit and one-month follow up. R: right, L: left, Int: internal.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Group mean values for each vein and student’s T-test comparison between control & patient groups and between control and follow-up groups.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 4.

Mean regional rCBF in the thalamus and striatum and cortical lobes of control and patient groups, with standard error bars.

* p < 0.05.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 3.

Comparison of mean CBF values (in mL/100g/min) between control and patient groups.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Fig 5.

Group differences in SAC scores between controls and mTBI patients.

* p < 0.05.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 4.

mTBI patients' SAC scores compared with normalized SAC scores.

More »

Table 4 Expand