Cited by 220Barrier Structure and Function StudiesTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesDrug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms

Changes in blood–brain barrier permeability to large and small molecules following traumatic brain injury in mice

Open access
Habgood, M. D., Bye, N., Dziegielewska, K. M., Ek, C. J., Lane, M. A., Potter, A., Morganti‐Kossmann, C, Saunders, N. R.·2007·European Journal of Neuroscience

Abstract

The entry of therapeutic compounds into the brain and spinal cord is normally restricted by barrier mechanisms in cerebral blood vessels (blood–brain barrier) and choroid plexuses (blood–CSF barrier). In the injured brain, ruptured cerebral blood vessels circumvent these barrier mechanisms by allowing blood contents to escape directly into the brain parenchyma. This process may contribute to the secondary damage that follows the initial primary injury. However, this localized compromise of barrier function in the injured brain may also provide a ‘window of opportunity’ through which drugs that do not normally cross the blood–brain barriers are able to do so. This paper describes a systematic study of barrier permeability in a mouse model of traumatic brain injury using both small and large inert molecules that can be visualized or quantified. The results show that soon after trauma, both large and small molecules are able to enter the brain in and around the injury site. Barrier restriction to large (protein‐sized) molecules is restored by 4–5 h after injury. In contrast, smaller molecules (286–10 000 Da) are still able to enter the brain as long as 4 days postinjury. Thus the period of potential secondary damage from barrier disruption and the period during which therapeutic compounds have direct access to the injured brain may be longer than previously thought.

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 · 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2006.05275.x

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • Loss of vascular integrity has a key role in mediating tissue damage after traumatic brain injury.

    “Loss of vascular integrity has a key role in mediating tissue damage after traumatic brain injury (TBI) (48, 223, 402, 536).”

    From Blood-Brain Barrier: From Physiology to Disease and Back (2019) · cites this paper as [223]

    The Introduction links disrupted blood supply and barrier mechanisms to secondary damage after TBI, and the Discussion says leaked plasma proteins put additional brain tissue at risk. The Abstract says vascular rupture *may contribute* to secondary damage; it does not establish that loss of vascular integrity has a key mediating role. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In preclinical models, blood-brain barrier alterations after traumatic brain injury occur in two phases: first within hours of tissue damage and the second 3 days after injury.

    “Similar to the pathophysiology of stroke, BBB alterations after TBI occur in two phases based on preclinical models, first occurring within hours of tissue damage and the second 3 days after injury (48, 223).”

    From Blood-Brain Barrier: From Physiology to Disease and Back (2019) · cites this paper as [223]

    The Introduction reports widespread leakage within 4–6 hours after injury, and the Discussion describes slower leakage afterward. The paper also reports permeability to smaller molecules lasting up to four days, but it does not establish a distinct second phase beginning three days after injury. No page numbers are available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Bruns, J. & Hauser, W.A. (2003) The epidemiology of traumatic brain injury: a review. Epilepsia, 44, 2-10.
  2. Cotran, K.S. & Karnovsky, M.J. (1967) Vascular leakage induced by horseradish peroxidase in the rat. Proc. Soc. Exp. Biol. Medical, 126, 557- 561.
  3. Ek, J., Habgood, M.D., Dziegielewska, K.M. & Saunders, N.R. (2001) Permeability of the blood-brain and blood-CSF barriers to small molecular weight lipid insoluble markers during postnatal development in the opossum, Monodelphis domestica. J. Physiol., 536, 841-853.
  4. Ek, C.J., Habgood, M.D., Dziegielewska, K.M. & Saunders, N.R. (2003) Structural characteristics and barrier properties of the choroid plexuses in developing brain of the opossum (Monodelphis Domestica). J. Comp. Neurol., 460, 451-464.
  5. Ek, C.J., Habgood, M.D., Dziegielewska, K.M. & Saunders, N.R. (2006) Functional effectiveness of blood-brain barrier to small water insoluble molecules in developing and adult opossum (Monodelphis domestica). J. Comp. Neurol., 496, 13-26.
  6. Morganti-Kossmann, M.C., Bye, N., Nguyen, P. & Kossmann, T. (2005) Influence of brain trauma on blood-brain barrier properties. In De Vries, E. & Prat, A., (Eds) The Blood-Brain Barrier and its Microenvironment. The Taylor & Francis Group, New York, pp. 457-480.
  7. Saunders, N.R., Habgood, M.D. & Dziegielewska, K.M. (1999) Barrier mechanisms in the brain, I. Adult brain. Clin. Exp. Pharmacol. Physiol., 26, 11-19.
  8. Stolp, H.B., Dziegielewska, K.M., Ek, C.J., Potter, A.M. & Saunders, N.R. (2005) Long-term changes in blood-brain barrier permeability and white matter following prolonged systemic inflammation in early development in the rat. Eur. J. Neurosci., 22, 2805-2816.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Habgood, M. D., Bye, N., Dziegielewska, K. M., Ek, C. J., Lane, M. A., Potter, A., Morganti‐Kossmann, C., & Saunders, N. R.
Affiliations
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
  • The Alfred Hospital (AU)
Corresponding author
Habgood, M. D.
Venue
European Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-01
Volume
25
Issue
1
Pages
231-238
ISSN
  • 0953-816X (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-9568
OpenAlex
W1485425418
Cited by
220
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 11
FWCI
8.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Barrier Structure and Function Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Traumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Drug Transport and Resistance Mechanisms
Keywords
blood-brain barrier permeability, traumatic brain injury, blood-CSF barrier, small molecule transport, protein trafficking, secondary brain injury, choroid plexus
MeSH terms
Animals, Biological Transport, Biotin, Blood Proteins, Blood-Brain Barrier, Brain Injuries, Capillary Permeability, Disease Models, Animal, Horseradish Peroxidase, Male, Mice, Inbred C57BL, Time Factors, Mice

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