Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 160

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Maturation-dependent response of the piglet brain to scaled cortical impact

Open access
Duhaime, Ann-Christine, Margulies, Susan S., Durham, Susan R., O'Rourke, Maureen M., Golden, Jeffrey A., Marwaha, Sunil, Raghupathi, Ramesh·2000·Journal of Neurosurgery

Abstract

Object. The goal of this study was to investigate the relationship between maturational stage and the brain's response to mechanical trauma in a gyrencephalic model of focal brain injury. Age-dependent differences in injury response might explain certain unique clinical syndromes seen in infants and young children and would determine whether specific therapies might be particularly effective or even counterproductive at different ages. Methods. To deliver proportionally identical injury inputs to animals of different ages, the authors have developed a piglet model of focal contusion injury by using specific volumes of rapid cortical displacement that are precisely scaled to changes in size and dimensions of the growing brain. Using this model, the histological response to a scaled focal cortical impact was compared at 7 days after injury in piglets that were 5 days, 1 month, and 4 months of age at the time of trauma. Despite comparable injury inputs and stable physiological parameters, the percentage of hemisphere injured differed significantly among ages, with the youngest animals sustaining the smallest lesions (0.8%, 8.4%, and 21.5%, for 5-day-, 1-month-, and 4-month-old animals, respectively, p = 0.0018). Conclusions. These results demonstrate that, for this particular focal injury type and severity, vulnerability to mechanical trauma increases progressively during maturation. Because of its developmental and morphological similarity to the human brain, the piglet brain provides distinct advantages in modeling age-specific responses to mechanical trauma. Differences in pathways leading to cell death or repair may be relevant to designing therapies appropriate for patients of different ages.

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 · 10.3171/jns.2000.93.3.0455

Cites

1 of 1 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

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

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 160

Metadata

Authors
Duhaime, A.-C., Margulies, S. S., Durham, S. R., O'Rourke, M. M., Golden, J. A., Marwaha, S., & Raghupathi, R.
Venue
Journal of Neurosurgery
Published
2000-09
Volume
93
Issue
3
Pages
455-462
ISSN
0022-3085 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2033665331
Cited by
160
References
1
FWCI
3.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Maturation-dependent response of the piglet brain to scaled cortical impact. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3171/jns.2000.93.3.0455
The paper
Duhaime, A.-C., Margulies, S. S., Durham, S. R., O'Rourke, M. M., Golden, J. A., Marwaha, S., & Raghupathi, R. (2000). Maturation-dependent response of the piglet brain to scaled cortical impact. Journal of Neurosurgery. https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.2000.93.3.0455

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.