Cited by 142Automotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesTraumatic Brain Injury Research

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 143 of the 166 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Porcine Model of Traumatic Brain Injury via Head Rotational Acceleration

Open access

Abstract

Unique from other brain disorders, traumatic brain injury (TBI) generally results from a discrete biomechanical event that induces rapid head movement. The large size and high organization of the human brain makes it particularly vulnerable to traumatic injury from rotational accelerations that can cause dynamic deformation of the brain tissue. Therefore, replicating the injury biomechanics of human TBI in animal models presents a substantial challenge, particularly with regard to addressing brain size and injury parameters. Here we present the historical development and use of a porcine model of head rotational acceleration. By scaling up the rotational forces to account for difference in brain mass between swine and humans, this model has been shown to produce the same tissue deformations and identical neuropathologies found in human TBI. The parameters of scaled rapid angular accelerations applied for the model reproduce inertial forces generated when the human head suddenly accelerates or decelerates in falls, collisions, or blunt impacts. The model uses custom-built linkage assemblies and a powerful linear actuator designed to produce purely impulsive non-impact head rotation in different angular planes at controlled rotational acceleration levels. Through a range of head rotational kinematics, this model can produce functional and neuropathological changes across the spectrum from concussion to severe TBI. Notably, however, the model is very difficult to employ, requiring a highly skilled team for medical management, biomechanics, neurological recovery, and specialized outcome measures including neuromonitoring, neurophysiology, neuroimaging, and neuropathology. Nonetheless, while challenging, this clinically relevant model has proven valuable for identifying mechanisms of acute and progressive neuropathologies as well as for the evaluation of noninvasive diagnostic techniques and potential neuroprotective treatments following TBI.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/978-1-4939-3816-2_17

Cites

143 of 143 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Graham R, Rivara FP, Ford MA, Spicer CM (2014) Sports-related concussions in youth: improving the science, changing the culture. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC
  2. Prevention, C. f. D. C. a., and Control, N. C. f. I. P. a. (2003) Report to congress on mild traumatic brain injury in the United States: steps to prevent a serious public health problem. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA
  3. Prevention, C. f. D. C. a. (2011) Nonfatal traumatic brain injuries related to sports and recreation activities among persons aged ≤19 Years—United States, 2001–2009. MMWR 60:1337–1342
  4. McIntosh TK, Smith DH, Meaney DF, Kotapka MJ, Gennarelli TA, Graham DI (1996) Neuropathological sequelae of traumatic brain injury: relationship to neurochemical and biomechanical mechanisms. Lab Invest 74:315–342
  5. Gennarelli TA (1993) Mechanisms of brain injury. J Emerg Med 11(Suppl 1):5–11
  6. McIntosh TK, Juhler M, Raghupathi R, Saatman KE, Smith DH (1999) Secondary brain injury: neurochemical and cellular mediators. In: Marion W (ed) Traumatic brain injury. Thieme Medical Publishers, New York, NY, pp 39–54
  7. McKee AC, Cantu RC, Nowinski CJ, Hedley-Whyte ET, Gavett BE, Budson AE, Santini VE, Lee HS, Kubilus CA, Stern RA (2009) Chronic traumatic encephalopathy in athletes: progressive tauopathy after repetitive head injury. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 68:709–735 · DOI · Paper page
  8. McIntosh TK (1994) Neurochemical sequelae of traumatic brain injury: therapeutic implications. Cerebrovasc Brain Metab Rev 6:109–162
  9. Ryan LM, Warden DL (2003) Post concussion syndrome. Int Rev Psychiatry 15:310–316 · DOI
  10. Yarnell P, Ommaya AK (1969) Experimental cerebral concussion in the rhesus monkey. Bull N Y Acad Med 45:39–45
  11. Gennarelli TA, Thibault LE, Ommaya AK (1971) Comparison of linear and rotational acceleration in experimental cerebral concussion. Proceedings of the 15th Stapp car crash conference, New York: society of automotive engineers, pp 797–803
  12. Kleiven S (2013) Why most traumatic brain injuries are not caused by linear acceleration but skull fractures are. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 1:15 · DOI
  13. Graham DI, Adams JH, Gennarelli TA (1988) Mechanisms of non-penetrating head injury. Prog Clin Biol Res 234:159–168
  14. Thibault LE, Gennarelli TA (1989) Biomechanics of diffuse brain injuries. Proceedings of the 10th international technical conference on experimental safety vehicles. DOT, NHTSA
  15. Wolf JA, Johnson BN, Johnson VE, Browne KD, Mietus CJ, Smith DH, Grady MS, Cohen A, Cullen DK (in review) Concussion induces hippocampal circuitry disruption in swine
  16. Wolf JA, Ulyanova AV, Browne KD, Koch P, Grovola MR, Johnson VE, Cullen DK (2014) Hippocampal network disruptions after diffuse brain injury in swine. Winter conference on brain research
  17. Gennarelli TA, Pintar FA, Yoganandan N (2003) Biomechanical tolerances for diffuse brain injury and a hypothesis for genotypic variability in response to trauma. Annu Proc Assoc Adv Automot Med 47:624–628

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 142

Metadata

Authors
Cullen, D. K., Harris, J. P., Browne, K. D., Wolf, J. A., Duda, J. E., Meaney, D. F., Margulies, S. S., & Smith, D. H.
Affiliations
  • Philadelphia VA Medical Center (US)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Corresponding author
Cullen, D. Kacy
Venue
Methods in Molecular Biology
Published
2016
Volume
1462
Pages
289-324
ISSN
  • 1064-3745 (ISSN-L)
  • 1940-6029
OpenAlex
W2514627507
Cited by
142
References
166
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 8
FWCI
72.55
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Methods in molecular biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (IK2 RX001479, I01-RX001097)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS038104, R01NS092398, R01NS088176, R01NS050598, R01NS101108, T32NS043126)
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (R01EB021293)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Clinical Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
traumatic brain injury, porcine model, angular acceleration, head rotation, brain deformation, injury biomechanics, concussion, linear actuator, neuropathology
MeSH terms
Acceleration, Brain Injuries, Traumatic, Animals, Biomechanical Phenomena, Biopsy, Disease Models, Animal, Humans, Immunohistochemistry, Rotation, Swine, Neuroimaging

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review