Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32881755›Full record

ArticleShock (Augusta, Ga.)2021

Survival Rates and Biomarkers in a Large Animal Model of Traumatic Brain Injury Combined With Two Different Levels of Blood Loss.

Andrew R Mayer, Andrew B Dodd, Josef M Ling, David D Stephenson, Julie G Rannou-Latella, Meghan S Vermillion, Carissa J Mehos, Victoria E Johnson, Andrew P Gigliotti, Rebecca J Dodd and 9 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Shock (Augusta, Ga.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.

Andrew R MayerThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Andrew B DoddThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Josef M LingThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
David D StephensonThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Julie G Rannou-LatellaThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Meghan S VermillionThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Carissa J MehosNeurosciences Department, University of New Mexico School of Medicine, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Victoria E JohnsonDepartment of Neurosurgery and Penn Center for Brain Injury and Repair, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Andrew P GigliottiThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Rebecca J DoddThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Irshad H ChaudryDepartment of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama.
Timothy B MeierDepartment of Neurosurgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Douglas H SmithDepartment of Neurosurgery and Penn Center for Brain Injury and Repair, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Denis E BraginThe Mind Research Network/Lovelace Biomedical Research Institute, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
Chen LaiNational Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Chelsea L WagnerNational Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Vivian A GuedesNational Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Jessica M GillNational Institute of Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland.
Rachel KinslerEnroute Care Group, U.S. Army Aeromedical Research Laboratory, Fort Rucker, Alabama.
Biomedical Research Institute · USMind Research Network · USUniversity of Pennsylvania · USNational Institutes of Health · USUniversity of New Mexico · USMedical College of Wisconsin · USNational Institute of Nursing Research · US

Funding

University of New Mexico (UNM) Center for Brain Recovery and RepairP20GM109089 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI SHUTTLEWORTH, CLAUDE W · 2015 to 2024
$22.7M
Neuropathological Characterization of 'CTE'R01NS094003 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI Douglas Hamilton Smith, William Stewart · 2016 to 2026
$5.1M
Brain Injury Treatment by Modulation of Hemodynamics With Blood Soluble Drag Reducing MoleculesR01NS112808 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI BRAGIN, DENIS E. · 2019 to 2023
$2.1M
Detection and Mechanisms of Mild Traumatic Brain InjuryR01NS092398 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA · PI SMITH, DOUGLAS HAMILTON · 2015 to 2019
$1.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS P20 GM109089NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS092398NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS094003NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS112808
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe pathology resulting from concurrent traumatic brain injury (TBI) and hemorrhagic shock (HS; TBI+HS) are leading causes of mortality and morbidity worldwide following trauma. However, the majority of large animal models of TBI+HS have utilized focal/contusional injuries rather than incorporating the types of brain trauma (closed-head injury caused by dynamic acceleration) that typify human injury.

objectiveTo examine survival rates and effects on biomarkers from rotational TBI with two levels of HS.

methodsTwenty-two sexually mature Yucatan swine (30.39 ± 2.25 kg; 11 females) therefore underwent either Sham trauma procedures (n = 6) or a dynamic acceleration TBI combined with either 55% (n = 8) or 40% (n = 8) blood loss in this serial study.

resultsSurvival rates were significantly higher for the TBI+40% (87.5%) relative to TBI+55% (12.5%) cohort, with the majority of TBI+55% animals expiring within 2 h post-trauma from apnea. Blood-based neural biomarkers and immunohistochemistry indicated evidence of diffuse axonal injury (increased NFL/Aβ42), blood-brain barrier breach (increased immunoglobulin G) and inflammation (increased glial fibrillary acidic protein/ionized calcium-binding adaptor molecule 1) in the injured cohorts relative to Shams. Invasive hemodynamic measurements indicated increased shock index and decreased pulse pressure in both injury cohorts, with evidence of partial recovery for invasive hemodynamic measurements in the TBI+40% cohort. Similarly, although both injury groups demonstrated ionic and blood gas abnormalities immediately postinjury, metabolic acidosis continued to increase in the TBI+55% group ∼85 min postinjury. Somewhat surprisingly, both neural and physiological biomarkers showed significant changes within the Sham cohort across the multi-hour experimental procedure, most likely associated with prolonged anesthesia.

conclusionCurrent results suggest the TBI+55% model may be more appropriate for severe trauma requiring immediate medical attention/standard fluid resuscitation protocols whereas the TBI+40% model may be useful for studies of prolonged field care.

Indexed as

AnimalsBiomarkersBrain Injuries, TraumaticDisease Models, AnimalFemaleMaleShock, HemorrhagicSurvival RateSwineBiomarkers

Identifiers

PMID32881755
PMCPMC8112147
OpenAlexW3082664954

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.