Posts Tagged Traumatic Brain Injury

[Abstract] Psychiatric disorders following traumatic brain injury: a nationwide population-based cohort study and the effects of rehabilitation therapies

Abstract

Objective

To investigate the risk of psychiatric disorders following TBI, and to clarify whether the post-TBI rehabilitation was associated with a lower risk of developing psychiatric disorders.

Design

A register-based, retrospective cohort design

Setting

Using data from the National Health Insurance Research Database (NHIRD) of Taiwan, we established an exposed cohort with TBI and a nonexposed group without TBI matched by age and year of diagnosis between 2000 and 2015.

Participants

This study included 231,894 patients with TBI and 695,682 controls.

Interventions

Rehabilitation therapies in TBI patients.

Main Outcome Measures

A multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to compare the risk of developing psychiatric disorders.

Results

The incidence rate of psychiatric disorders was higher in the TBI group when compared with the control group. Compared with the control group, the risk of psychiatric disorders in the TBI group was twofold (HR=2.056, 95% CI:1.940- 2.172, p < 0.001). Among the TBI subjects, 49,270 (21.25%) had received rehabilitation therapy and had a lower risk of psychiatric disorders (HR=0.691, 95% CI: 0.679-0.703, p < 0.001). In the subgroup analysis, the medium- to high-level intensity rehabilitation therapy was associated with lower risks of psychiatric disorder (HR=0.712 and 0.568, respectively), but there was no significant finding in the low-intensity group.

Conclusions

We found that TBI was associated with a high risk for developing psychiatric disorders, and that the post-TBI rehabilitation significantly reduced the risk of psychiatric disorders in a dose-dependent manner.

via Psychiatric disorders following traumatic brain injury: a nationwide population-based cohort study and the effects of rehabilitation therapies – Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

, , , ,

Leave a comment

[VIDEO] Managing Fatigue After A Brain Injury – YouTube

via Managing Fatigue After A Brain Injury – YouTube

, , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract] Music Therapy Enhances Executive Functions and Prefrontal Structural Neuroplasticity after Traumatic Brain Injury: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) causes lifelong cognitive deficits, particularly impairments of executive functioning (EF). Musical training and music-based rehabilitation have been shown to enhance cognitive functioning and neuroplasticity, but the potential rehabilitative effects of music in TBI are still largely unknown. The aim of the present crossover randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to determine the clinical efficacy of music therapy on cognitive functioning in TBI and to explore its neural basis.

Using an AB/BA design, 40 patients with moderate or severe TBI were randomized to receive a 3-month neurological music therapy intervention either during the first (AB, n = 20) or second (BA, n = 20) half of a 6-month follow-up period. Neuropsychological and motor testing and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were performed at baseline and at the 3-month and 6-month stage. Thirty-nine subjects who participated in baseline measurement were included in an intention-to-treat analysis using multiple imputation. Results showed that general EF (as indicated by the Frontal Assessment Battery [FAB]) and set shifting improved more in the AB group than in the BA group over the first 3-month period and the effect on general EF was maintained in the 6-month follow-up. Voxel-based morphometry (VBM) analysis of the structural MRI data indicated that gray matter volume (GMV) in the right inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) increased significantly in both groups during the intervention versus control period, which also correlated with cognitive improvement in set shifting. These findings suggest that neurological music therapy enhances EF and induces fine-grained neuroanatomical changes in prefrontal areas.

 

via Music Therapy Enhances Executive Functions and Prefrontal Structural Neuroplasticity after Traumatic Brain Injury: Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial | Journal of Neurotrauma

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[ARTICLE] Endocannabinoids: A Promising Impact for Traumatic Brain Injury – Full Text

Abstract

The endogenous cannabinoid (endocannabinoid) system regulates a diverse array of physiological processes and unsurprisingly possesses considerable potential targets for the potential treatment of numerous disease states, including two receptors (i.e., CB1 and CB2 receptors) and enzymes regulating their endogenous ligands N-arachidonoylethanolamine (anandamide) and 2-arachidonyl glycerol (2-AG). Increases in brain levels of endocannabinoids to pathogenic events suggest this system plays a role in compensatory repair mechanisms. Traumatic brain injury (TBI) pathology remains mostly refractory to currently available drugs, perhaps due to its heterogeneous nature in etiology, clinical presentation, and severity. Here, we review pre-clinical studies assessing the therapeutic potential of cannabinoids and manipulations of the endocannabinoid system to ameliorate TBI pathology. Specifically, manipulations of endocannabinoid degradative enzymes (e.g., fatty acid amide hydrolase, monoacylglycerol lipase, and α/β-hydrolase domain-6), CB1 and CB2 receptors, and their endogenous ligands have shown promise in modulating cellular and molecular hallmarks of TBI pathology such as; cell death, excitotoxicity, neuroinflammation, cerebrovascular breakdown, and cell structure and remodeling. TBI-induced behavioral deficits, such as learning and memory, neurological motor impairments, post-traumatic convulsions or seizures, and anxiety also respond to manipulations of the endocannabinoid system. As such, the endocannabinoid system possesses potential drugable receptor and enzyme targets for the treatment of diverse TBI pathology. Yet, full characterization of TBI-induced changes in endocannabinoid ligands, enzymes, and receptor populations will be important to understand that role this system plays in TBI pathology. Promising classes of compounds, such as the plant-derived phytocannabinoids, synthetic cannabinoids, and endocannabinoids, as well as their non-cannabinoid receptor targets, such as TRPV1 receptors, represent important areas of basic research and potential therapeutic interest to treat TBI.

 

Introduction

Traumatic brain injury accounts for approximately 10 million deaths and/or hospitalizations annually in the world, and approximately 1.5 million annual emergency room visits and hospitalizations in the US (). Young men are consistently over-represented as being at greatest risk for TBI (). While half of all traumatic deaths in the USA are due to brain injury (), the majority of head injuries are considered mild and often never receive medical treatment (). Survivors of TBI are at risk for lowered life expectancy, dying at a 3⋅2 times more rapid rate than the general population (). Survivors also face long term physical, cognitive, and psychological disorders that greatly diminish quality of life. Even so-called mild TBI without notable cell death may lead to enduring cognitive deficits (). A 2007 study estimated that TBI results in $330,827 of average lifetime costs associated with disability and lost productivity, and greatly outweighs the $65,504 estimated costs for initial medical care and rehabilitation (), demonstrating both the long term financial and human toll of TBI.

The development of management protocols in major trauma centers () has improved mortality and functional outcomes (). Monitoring of intracranial pressure is now standard practice (), and advanced MRI technologies help define the extent of brain injury in some cases (). Current treatment of major TBI is primarily managed through surgical intervention by decompressive craniotomy () which involves the removal of skull segments to reduce intracranial pressure. Delayed decompressive craniotomy is also increasingly used for intractable intracranial hypertension (). The craniotomy procedure is associated with considerable complications, such as hematoma, subdural hygroma, and hydrocephalus (). At present, the pathology associated with TBI remains refractive to currently available pharmacotherapies () and as such represents an area of great research interest and in need of new potential targets. Effective TBI drug therapies have yet to be proven, despite promising preclinical data () plagued by translational problems once reaching clinical trials ().

The many biochemical events that occur in the hours and months following TBI have yielded preclinical studies directed toward a single injury mechanism. However, an underlying premise of the present review is an important need to address the multiple targets associated with secondary injury cascades following TBI. A growing body of published scientific research indicates that the endogenous cannabinoid (endocannabinoid; eCB) system possesses several targets uniquely positioned to modulate several key secondary events associated with TBI. Here, we review the preclinical work examining the roles that the different components of the eCB system play in ameliorating pathologies associated with TBI.

The Endocannabinoid (eCB) System

Originally, “Cannabinoid” was the collective name assigned to the set of naturally occurring aromatic hydrocarbon compounds in the Cannabis sativa plant (). Cannabinoid now more generally refers to a much more broad set of chemicals of diverse structure whose pharmacological actions or structure closely mimic that of plant-derived cannabinoids. Three predominant categories are currently in use; plant-derived phytocannabinoids (reviewed in ), synthetically produced cannabinoids used as research () or recreational drugs (), and the endogenous cannabinoids, N-arachidonoylethanolamine (anandamide) () and 2-AG ().

These three broad categories of cannabinoids generally act through cannabinoid receptors, two types of which have so far been identified, CB1 () and CB2 (). Both CB1 and CB2 receptors are coupled to signaling cascades predominantly through Gi/o-coupled proteins. CB1 receptors mediate most of the psychomimetic effects of cannabis, its chief psychoactive constituent THC, and many other CNS active cannabinoids. These receptors are predominantly expressed on pre-synaptic axon terminals (), are activated by endogenous cannabinoids that function as retrograde messengers, which are released from post-synaptic cells, and their activation ultimately dampens pre-synaptic neurotransmitter release (). Acting as a neuromodulatory network, the outcome of cannabinoid receptor signaling depends on cell type and location. CB1 receptors are highly expressed on neurons in the central nervous system (CNS) in areas such as cerebral cortex, hippocampus, caudate-putamen (). In contrast, CB2 receptors are predominantly expressed on immune cells, microglia in the CNS, and macrophages, monocytes, CD4+ and CD8+ T cells, and B cells in the periphery (). Additionally, CB2 receptors are expressed on neurons, but to a much less extent than CB1 receptors (). The abundant, yet heterogeneous, distribution of CB1 and CB2 receptors throughout the brain and periphery likely accounts for their ability to impact a wide variety of physiological and psychological processes (e.g., memory, anxiety, and pain perception, reviewed in ) many of which are impacted following TBI.

Another unique property of the eCB system is the functional selectivity produced by its endogenous ligands. Traditional neurotransmitter systems elicit differential activation of signaling pathways through activation of receptor subtypes by one neurotransmitter (). However, it is the endogenous ligands of eCB receptors which produce such signaling specificity. Although several endogenous cannabinoids have been described () the two most studied are anandamide () and 2-AG (). 2-AG levels are three orders of magnitude higher than those of anandamide in brain (). Additionally, their receptor affinity () and efficacy differ, with 2-AG acting as a high efficacy agonist at CB1 and CB2 receptors, while anandamide behaves as a partial agonist (). In addition, anandamide binds and activates TRPV1 receptors (), whereas 2-AG also binds GABAA receptors (). As such, cannabinoid ligands differentially modulate similar physiological and pathological processes.

Distinct sets of enzymes, which regulate the biosynthesis and degradation of the eCBs and possess distinct anatomical distributions (see Figure Figure11), exert control over CB1 and CB2 receptor signaling. Inactivation of anandamide occurs predominantly through FAAH (), localized to intracellular membranes of postsynaptic somata and dendrites (), in areas such as the neocortex, cerebellar cortex, and hippocampus (). Inactivation of 2-AG proceeds primarily via MAGL (), expressed on presynaptic axon terminals (), and demonstrates highest expression in areas such as the thalamus, hippocampus, cortex, and cerebellum (). The availability of pharmacological inhibitors for eCB catabolic enzymes has allowed the selective amplification of anandamide and 2-AG levels following brain injury as a key strategy to enhance eCB signaling and to investigate their potential neuroprotective effects.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.Object name is fphar-08-00069-g001.jpg

FIGURE 1
Endocannabinoid system cell localization by CNS cell type. Endocannabinoid functional specialization among CNS cell types is determined by the cellular compartmentalization of biosynthetic and catabolic enzymes (biosynthesis by NAPE and DAGL-α, -β, catabolism by FAAH and MAGL). Cellular level changes in eCB biosynthetic and catabolic enzymes as a result of brain injury have yet to be investigated, though morphological and molecular reactivity by cell type is well documented.

[…]

 

Continue —-> Endocannabinoids: A Promising Impact for Traumatic Brain Injury

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[NEWS] Telemedicine may be as effective as in-person visit for people with many neurologic disorders

For people with many neurologic disorders, seeing the neurologist by video may be as effective as an in-person visit, according to a review of the evidence conducted by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN). The evidence review examined all available studies on use of telemedicine for several neurologic conditions – stroke being one of the conditions that is well-validated and highly utilizes telemedicine – and is published in the December 4, 2019, online issue of Neurology®, the medical journal of the AAN. The results indicate that a diagnosis from a neurologist by video for certain neurologic conditions is likely to be as accurate as an in-person visit.

Telemedicine is the use of video conferencing or other technology for doctor visits from another location. The patient could be at home or at a local doctor’s office.

Telemedicine can be especially helpful for people with epilepsy, who may not be able to drive to appointments, people with neurologic disorders like multiple sclerosis and movement disorders, who may have mobility issues that make getting to a clinic difficult, and, of course, for people in rural areas who may not be able to see a neurologist based hours away without making that trip. Another effective use may be for evaluating people with possible concussions, where telemedicine could be used on-site to make an immediate diagnosis. For sports injuries, it could be used to make a decision on whether the athlete is ready to return to the field.”

Jaime Hatcher-Martin, MD, PhD, lead author who was with Emory University in Atlanta while serving on the American Academy of Neurology’s Telemedicine Work Group, is now with the company SOC Telemed and is a member of the American Academy of Neurology

For the evidence review, the researchers analyzed 101 studies on telemedicine use in the areas of concussion and traumatic brain injury, dementia, epilepsy, headache, multiple sclerosis, movement disorders, neuromuscular conditions and general neurology. Hatcher-Martin noted that evidence for the use of telemedicine for stroke has been well-established.

Overall, studies found that patients and their caregivers were just as satisfied with virtual doctor visits as they were with in-person visits. Some studies show that using telemedicine is as effective as in-person visits to make accurate diagnoses and in some cases may show improved health outcomes. However, few randomized, controlled studies have been conducted on telemedicine for neurology, outside of stroke. In many areas, little research has been done.

“This is just the beginning of evaluating the benefits of telemedicine in neurology,” said senior author Raghav Govindarajan, MD, of the University of Missouri, who served as a chair on the American Academy of Neurology’s Telemedicine Work Group and is a Fellow of the American Academy of Neurology.

“We need to conduct further studies to better understand when virtual appointments are a good option for a patient. Keep in mind that telemedicine may not eliminate the need for people to meet with a neurologist in person. Rather, it is another tool that can help increase people’s access to care and also help lessen the burden of travel and costs for patients, providers and caregivers.”

via Telemedicine may be as effective as in-person visit for people with many neurologic disorders

, , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[WEB SITE] Traumatic brain injuries could be healed using peptide hydrogels

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) –– defined as a bump, blow or jolt to the head that disrupts normal brain function –– sent 2.5 million people in the U.S. to the emergency room in 2014, according to statistics from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Today, researchers report a self-assembling peptide hydrogel that, when injected into the brains of rats with TBI, increased blood vessel regrowth and neuronal survival.

The researchers will present their results at the American Chemical Society (ACS) Fall 2019 National Meeting & Exposition. ACS, the world’s largest scientific society, is holding the meeting here through Thursday. It features more than 9,500 presentations on a wide range of science topics.

“When we think about traumatic brain injuries, we think of soldiers and athletes,” says Biplab Sarkar, Ph.D., who is presenting the work at the meeting. “But most TBIs actually happen when people fall or are involved in motor vehicle accidents. As the average age of the country continues to rise, the number of fall-related accidents in particular will also increase.”

TBIs encompass two types of injuries. Primary injury results from the initial mechanical damage to neurons and other cells in the brain, as well as blood vessels. Secondary injuries, which can occur seconds after the TBI and last for years, include oxidative stress, inflammation and disruption of the blood-brain barrier. “The secondary injury creates this neurotoxic environment that can lead to long-term cognitive effects,” Sarkar says. For example, TBI survivors can experience impaired motor control and an increased rate of depression, he says. Currently, there is no effective regenerative treatment for TBIs.

Sarkar and Vivek Kumar, Ph.D., the project’s principal investigator, wanted to develop a therapy that could help treat secondary injuries.

We wanted to be able to regrow new blood vessels in the area to restore oxygen exchange, which is reduced in patients with a TBI. Also, we wanted to create an environment where neurons can be supported and even thrive.”

Biplab Sarkar, Ph.D., New Jersey Institute of Technology

The researchers, both at the New Jersey Institute of Technology, had previously developed peptides that can self-assemble into hydrogels when injected into rodents. By incorporating snippets of particular protein sequences into the peptides, the team can give them different functions. For example, Sarkar and Kumar previously developed angiogenic peptide hydrogels that grow new blood vessels when injected under the skin of mice.

To adapt their technology to the brain, Sarkar and Kumar modified the peptide sequences to make the material properties of the hydrogel more closely resemble those of brain tissue, which is softer than most other tissues of the body. They also attached a sequence from a neuroprotective protein called ependymin. The researchers tested the new peptide hydrogel in a rat model of TBI. When injected at the injury site, the peptides self-assembled into a hydrogel that acted as a neuroprotective niche to which neurons could attach.

A week after injecting the hydrogel, the team examined the rats’ brains. They found that in the presence of the hydrogel, survival of the brain cells dramatically improved, resulting in about twice as many neurons at the injury site in treated rats than in control animals with brain injury. In addition, the researchers saw signs of new blood vessel formation. “We saw some indications that the rats in the treated group were more ambulatory than those in the control group, but we need to do more experiments to actually quantify that,” Sarkar says.

According to Kumar, one of the next steps will be to study the behavior of the treated animals to assess their functional recovery from TBI. The researchers are also interested in treating rats with a combination of their previous angiogenic peptide and their new neurogenic version to see if this could enhance recovery. And finally, they plan to find out if the peptide hydrogels work for more diffuse brain injuries, such as concussions. “We’ve seen that we can inject these materials into a defined injury and get good tissue regeneration, but we’re also collaborating with different groups to find out if it could help with the types of injuries we see in soldiers, veterans and even people working at construction sites who experience blast injuries,” Kumar says.

via Traumatic brain injuries could be healed using peptide hydrogels

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[BLOG] PROMOTING A BRAIN HEALING LIFESTYLE

, , ,

Leave a comment

[Abstract + References] Epileptic and Nonepileptic Seizures after Traumatic Brain Injury

Abstract

Representing approximately 5% of epilepsy in the civilian population and up to 50% in certain military populations, posttraumatic epilepsy warrants both increased clinical attention and research considerations. In this chapter, we will discuss the important definitions when considering posttraumatic epilepsy including the timing of posttraumatic seizures and the severity of head injuries. We will also review the epidemiology and risk factors for posttraumatic epilepsy in both the civilian population and the military and will describe the association of head trauma and psychogenic nonepileptic seizures. Our clinical discussion focuses on the timing of posttraumatic seizures, the utility of diagnostic testing, treatment of posttraumatic epilepsy, and outcomes of these patients. In addition, we elucidate potential pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying posttraumatic epilepsy and consider its role as a model for epileptogenesis in current and future research. We highlight the relevant studies in each section and underscore the theme that more research is certainly needed in most areas of posttraumatic epilepsy.

References

  1. 1.
    Caveness WF, Meirowsky AM, Rish BL, Mohr JP, Kistler JP, Dillon JD, et al. The nature of posttraumatic epilepsy. J Neurosurg. 1979;50:545–53.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lowenstein DH. Epilepsy after head injury: an overview. Epilepsia. 2009;50 (Suppl. 2):4–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Faul M, Xu L, Wald MM, Coronado VG. Traumatic brain injury in the United States: emergency department visits, hospitalizations and deaths 2002-2006. Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Center for Injury Prevention and Control; 2010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kovacs SK, Leonessa F, Ling GS. Blast TBI models, neuropathology, and implications for seizure risk. Front Neurol. 2014;5:47.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Snell FI, Halter MJ. A signature wound of war. J Psychosoc Nurs Ment Health Serv. 2010:1–7.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zarocostas J. Proliferation of firearms is growing global health problem. Br Med J. 2007;335:470–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Agrawal A, Timothy J, Pandit L, Manju M. Post-traumatic epilepsy: an overview. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2006;108:433–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hauser WA, Annegers JF, Kurland LT. Prevalence of epilepsy in Rochester, Minnesota, 1940-1980. Epilepsia. 1991;31:429–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Salazar AM, Jabbari B, Vance SC, Grafman J, Amin D, Dillon JD. Epilepsy after penetrating head injury. I. Clinical correlates: a report of the Vietnam head injury study. Neurology. 1985;35:1406–14.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Annegers JF, Coan SP. The risks of epilepsy after traumatic brain injury. Seizure. 2000;9:453–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Annegers JF, Hauser WA, Coan SP, Rocca WA. A population-based study of seizures after traumatic brain injuries. N Engl J Med. 1998;338:20–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferguson PL, Smith GM, Wannamaker BB, Thurman DJ, Pickelsimer EE, Selassie AW. A population-based study of risk of epilepsy after hospitalization for traumatic brain injury. Epilepsia. 2010;51:891–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Herman ST. Epilepsy after brain insult: Targeting epileptogenesis. Neurology. 2002;59(Suppl 5):S21–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Christensen J, Pedersen MG, Pedersen CB, Sidenius P, Olse J, Vestergaard M. Long term risk of epilepsy after traumatic brain injury in children and young adults: a population-based cohort study. Lancet. 2009;373:1105–10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mahler B, Carlsson S, Andersson T, Adelow C, Ahlbom A, Tomson T. Unprovoked seizures after traumatic brain injury: a population-based case-control study. Epilepsia. 2015;56:1438–44.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Pugh MJ, Orman JA, Jaramillo CA, Salinsky MC, Eapen BC, Towne AR, et al. The prevalence of epilepsy and association with traumatic brain injury in veterans of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2014;30:29–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yeh CC, Chen TL, Hu CJ, Chiu WT, Liao CC. Risk of epilepsy after traumatic brain injury: a retrospective population-based cohort study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2013;84:441–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Annegers J, Grabow J, Groover R, Laws E, Elveback L, Kurland L. Seizures after head trauma: a population study. Neurology. 1980;30:683–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jennett WB, Lewin W. Traumatic epilepsy after closed head injuries. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1960;23:295–301.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Angeleri F, Majkowski J, Cacchio G, Sobieszek S, D’Acunto S, Gesuita R, et al. Posttraumatic epilepsy risk factors: one-year prospective study after head injury. Epilepsia. 1999;40:1222–30.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Englander J, Bushnik T, Duong TT, Cifu DX, Zafonte R, Wright J, et al. Analyzing risk factors for late post-traumatic seizures: a prospective, multicenter investigation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2003;84:365–73.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Asikainen I, Kaste M, Sarna S. Early and late posttraumatic seizure in traumatic brain injury rehabilitation patients: brain injury factors causing late seizures and influence of seizures on long-term outcome. Epilepsia. 1999;40:584–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Raymont V, Salazar AM, Lipsky R, Goldman D, Tasick G, Grafman J. Correlates of posttraumatic epilepsy 35 years following combat brain injury. Neurology. 2010;75:224–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Masel BE, Bell RS, Brossart S, Grill RJ, Hayes RL, Levin HS, et al. Galveston brain injury conference 2010: clinical and experimental aspects of blast injury. J Neurotrauma. 2012;29:2143–71.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Okie S. Traumatic brain injury in the war zone. N Engl J Med. 2005;352:2043–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chase RP, Nevin RL. Population estimates of undocumented incident traumatic brain injuries among combat-deployed US military personnel. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2015;30(1):E57–64.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Brundage JF, Taubman SB, Hunt DJ, Clark LL. Whither the “signature wounds of the war” after the war: estimates of incidence rates and proportions of TBI and PTSD diagnoses attributable to background risk, enhanced ascertainment, and active war zone service, active component, U.S Armed Forces, 2003-2014. Medical Surveillance Monthly Report. 2015;22(2):2–11.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Salinksy M, Evrard C, Storzbach D, Pugh MJ. Psychiatric comorbidity in veterans with psychogenic seizures. Epilepsy Behav. 2012;25:345–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Salinksy M, Spencer D, Boudreau E, Ferguson F. Psychogenic nonepileptic seizures in US veterans. Neurology. 2011;77:945–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Salinksy M, Storzbach D, Goy E, Evrad C. Traumatic brain injury and psychogenic seizures in veterans. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2015;30:E65–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Chen LL, Baca CB, Choe J, Chen JW, Ayad ME, Cheng EM. Posttraumatic epilepsy in operation enduring freedom/operation Iraqi freedom veterans. Mil Med. 2014;179:492–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lee ST, Lui TN. Early seizures after mild closed head injury. J Neurosurg. 1992;76:435–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Haltiner AM, Temkin NR, Dikmen SS. Risk of seizure recurrence after the first late posttraumatic seizure. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:835–40.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Gupta PK, Sayed N, Ding K, Agostini MA, Van Ness PC, Yablon S, et al. Subtypes of post-traumatic epilepsy: clinical, electrophysiological, and imaging features. J Neurotrauma. 2014;31:1439–43.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Diaz-Arrastia R, Agostini MA, Madden CJ, Van Ness PC. Posttraumatic epilepsy: the endophenotypes of a human model of epileptogenesis. Epilepsia. 2009;50(Suppl 2):14–20.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Jennett B, van de Sande J. EEG prediction of post-traumatic epilepsy. Epilepsia. 1975;16:251–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    D’Alessandro R, Tinuper P, Ferrara R, Cortelli P, Pazzaglia P, Sabattini L, et al. CT scan prediction of late post-traumatic epilepsy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1982;45:1153–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Thiruppathy SP, Muthukumar N. Mild head injury: revisited. Acta Neurochir (Wein). 2004;146(10):1075–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kumar R, Gupta RK, Husain M, Vatsal DK, Chawla S, Rathore RKS, et al. Magnetization transfer MR imaging in patients with posttraumatic epilepsy. Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;23:218–24.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fox WC, Park MS, Belverud S, Klugh A, Rivet D, Tomlin JM. Contemporary imaging of mild TBI: the journey toward diffusion tensor imaging to assess neuronal damage. Neurol Res. 2013;35:223–32.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Hunter JV, Wilde EA, Tong KA, Holshouser BA. Emerging imaging tools for use with traumatic brain injury research. J Neurotrauma. 2012;29:654–71.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Immonen R, Kharatishvili I, Grohn O, Pitkanen A. MRI biomarkers for post-traumatic epileptogenesis. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30:1305–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Temkin NR. Preventing and treating posttraumatic seizures: the human experience. Epilepsia. 2009;50(Suppl. 2):10–3.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Temkin NR, Dikmen SS, Wilensky AJ, Keihm J, Chabal S, Winn HR. A randomized, double-blind study of phenytoin for the prevention of post-traumatic seizures. N Engl J Med. 1990;323:497–502.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Young B, Rapp RP, Norton JA, Haack D, Tibbs PA, Bean JR. Failure of prophylactically administered phenytoin to prevent late post-traumatic seizures. J Neurosurg. 1983;58:236–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Temkin NR, Dikmen SS, Anderson GD, Wilensky AJ, Holmes MD, Cohen W, et al. Valproate therapy for prevention of posttraumatic seizures: a randomized trial. J Neurosurg. 1999;91:593–600.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Chang BS, Lowenstein DH, Quality Standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Practice parameter: antiepileptic drug prophylaxis in severe traumatic brain injury: report of the quality standards Subcommittee of the American Academy of neurology. Neurology. 2003;60(1):10–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Szaflarski JP, Sangha KS, Lindsell CJ, Shutter LA. Prospective, randomized, single-blinded comparative trial of intravenous levetiracetam versus phenytoin for seizure prophylaxis. Neurocrit Care. 2010;12:165–72.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Kwan P, Sander JW. The natural history of epilepsy: an epidemiological view. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2004;75:1376–81.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Englot DJ, Rolston JD, Wang DD, Hassnain KH, Gordon CM, Chang EF. Efficacy of vagus nerve stimulation in posttraumatic versus nontraumatic epilepsy. J Neurosurg. 2012;117:970–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Heck CN, King-Stephens D, Massey AD, Nair DR, Jobst BC, Barkley GL, et al. Two-year seizure reduction in adults with medically intractable partial onset epilepsy treated with responsive neurostimulation: final results of the RNS system pivotal trial. Epilepsia. 2014;55:432–41.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Fisher R, Salanova V, Witt T, Worth R, Henry T, Gross R, et al. Electrical stimulation of the anterior nucleus of thalamus for treatment of refractory epilepsy. Epilepsia. 2010;51:899–908.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Fisher RS, Velasco AL. Electrical brain stimulation for epilepsy. Nat Rev Neurol. 2014;10:261–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Rao VR, Parko KL. Clinical approach to posttraumatic epilepsy. Semin Neurol. 2015;35:57–63.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Frey LC. Epidemiology of posttraumatic epilepsy: a critical review. Epilepsia. 2003;44(suppl 10):11–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Corkin S, Sullivan EV, Carr FA. Prognostic factors for life expectancy after penetrating head injury. Arch Neurol. 1984;41(9):975–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Algattas H, Huang JH. Traumatic brain injury pathophysiology and treatments: early, intermediate, and late phases post-injury. Int J Mol Sci. 2013;30:309–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Diamond ML, Ritter AC, Failla MD, Boles JA, Conley YP, Kochanek PM, et al. IL-1β associations with posttraumatic epilepsy development: a genetics and biomarker cohort study. Epilepsia. 2015;56:991–1001.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Jensen FE. Posttraumatic Epilepsy: Treatable epileptogenesis. Epilepsia. 2009;50(Suppl. 2):1–3.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Prince DA, Parada I, Scalise K, Graber K, Jin X, Shen F. Epilepsy following cortical injury: cellular and molecular mechanisms as targets for potential prophylaxis. Epilepsia. 2009;50(Suppl. 2):30–40.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Pitkanen A, Immonen RJ, Grohn OHJ, Kharatishvili I. From traumatic brain injury to posttraumatic epilepsy: what animal models tell us about the process and treatment options. Epilepsia. 2009;50(Suppl. 2):21–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kelly KM, Miller ER, Lepsveridze E, Kharlamov E, Mchedlishvili Z. Posttraumatic seizures and epilepsy in adult rats after controlled cortical impact. Epilepsy Res. 2015;117:104–16.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Desai BT, Whitman S, Coonley-Hoganson R, Coleman TE, Gabriel G, Dell J. Seizures and civilian head injuries. Epilepsia. 1983;24:289–96.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Hahn YS, Fuchs S, Flannery AM, Barthel MJ, McLone DG. Factors influencing posttraumatic seizures in children. Neurosurgery. 1988;22:864–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

via Epileptic and Nonepileptic Seizures after Traumatic Brain Injury | SpringerLink

, , , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[WEB SITE] TBI MOOC Starts Today! – Physiospot – Physiotherapy and Physical Therapy in the Spotlight

The latest Physiopedia MOOC is up and running today!

If you’re new to the term MOOC it is an acronym for Massive Online Open Course and each year Physiopedia has one for you to take part in for free. The courses Physiopedia have hosted have been hugely successful and have covered a diverse range of topics. This year the topic is Traumatic Brain Injury and it starts today!

The 2019 MOOC aims to provide a basic theoretical understanding of the management of traumatic brain injury in order to equip physiotherapists with sufficient knowledge to manage a person following a traumatic brain injury. This includes assessing impairments, activity limitations and participation restrictions, setting appropriate goals of treatment, formulating an evidence-based treatment plan, implementing treatment and evaluating its success.

Check out the video below to find out more!

How Do I Sign Up?

This is a completely online course which will take place in Physiopedia’s complimentary e-learning platform Physioplus. You will need need to set up a FREE trial account to access the course, you can do that here. The course will become available on the Physioplus site on 21 October 2019, we place the link at the top of this page and also email it to you. If you’d like to know more about the course check out some more details on the PP page dedicated to the MOOC.

Take Part in the MOOC for Free!

Accreditation!

The course will be accredited in 32 States in the USA, Australia and South Africa. That’s right this course comes with free CEUs and CPD Credits if you take part and complete the course.

Don’t forget to choose your favourite T-Shirt for our design competition!

via TBI MOOC Starts Today! – Physiospot – Physiotherapy and Physical Therapy in the Spotlight

, , , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

[VIDEO] The Invisible Rain Cloud: What’s It Like To Live With A Traumatic Brain Injury? – YouTube

De Caro & Kaplen, LLP

Find out more at https://brainlaw.com/invisible-rain-c… A TBI is a life changing event. But traumatic brain injury is often called “The Invisible Injury” as injuries (and symptoms) will not always be obvious to an observer.

And for those suffering from a TBI it can be difficult to explain how they feel inside.

Every 21 seconds, one person in the USA sustains a brain injury.

And each year over 2.5 million Americans visit the emergency room after suffering a traumatic brain injury, with an estimated 282,000 require hospitalization.

While every TBI is different, and everyone will experience their injury in a unique way, “The Invisible Rain Cloud” attempts to explain some of the common symptoms and feelings an individual may face in their life after brain injury.

The video was created by New York brain injury lawyers De Caro & Kaplen, LLP (https://brainlaw.com), who have been advocating on behalf of individuals suffering from a brain injury for over 30 years.

Find out more at https://brainlaw.com/invisible-rain-c…

Credits:

Music: Acoustic Breeze from https://www.bensound.com/ Brain Injury Association Of America Logo © The Brain Injury Association Of America Images created using https://www.pixton.com/

via The Invisible Rain Cloud: What’s It Like To Live With A Traumatic Brain Injury? – YouTube

, , , , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: