Cited by 161Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesAutomotive and Human Injury BiomechanicsTraumatic Brain Injury Research

Ultrastructural evidence of axonal shearing as a result of lateral acceleration of the head in non-human primates

Maxwell, W. L., Watt, C., Graham, D. I., Gennarelli, T. A.·1993·Acta Neuropathologica

Abstract

The concept of shearing of axons at the time of non-impact injury to the head was first suggested in the middle of this century. However, no experimental model of diffuse axonal injury (DAI) has provided morphological confirmation of this concept. Evidence from experiments on invertebrate axons suggests that membrane resealing after axonal transection occurs between 5 and 30 min after injury. Thus, ultrastructural evidence in support of axonal shearing will probably only be obtained by examination of very short-term survival animal models. We have examined serial thin sections from the corpus callosum of non-human primates exposed to lateral acceleration of the head under conditions which induce DAI. Tearing or shearing of axons was obtained 20 and 35 min after injury, but not at 60 min. Axonal fragmentation occurred more frequently at the node/paranode but also in the internodal regions of axons. Fragmentation occurred most frequently in small axons. Axonal shearing was associated with dissolution of the cytoskeleton and the occurrence of individual, morphologically abnormal membranous organelles. There was no aggregation of membranous organelles at 20 and 35 min but small groups did occur in some axons at 60 minutes. We suggest that two different mechanisms of injury may be occurring in non-impact injury to the head. The first is shearing of axons and sealing of fragmented axonal membranes within 60 min. A second mechanism occurs in other fibres where perturbation of the ax…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf00334880

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Maxwell, W. L., Watt, C., Graham, D. I., & Gennarelli, T. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Glasgow (GB)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
Venue
Acta Neuropathologica
Published
1993-07
Volume
86
Issue
2
Pages
136-144
ISSN
  • 0001-6322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-0533
OpenAlex
W2088301798
Cited by
161
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 9
FWCI
4.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Acta Neuropathologica (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (NS-08803-21)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Automotive and Human Injury Biomechanics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Traumatic Brain Injury Research
Keywords
axonal shearing, diffuse axonal injury, lateral acceleration, corpus callosum, axonal swellings, membranous organelles, non-human primates, ultrastructure
MeSH terms
Acceleration, Animals, Haplorhini, Axons, Axonal Transport, Brain, Corpus Callosum, Craniocerebral Trauma, Microscopy, Electron, Nerve Fibers, Ranvier's Nodes, Time Factors

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