Goldstein Lee E, McKee Ann C, Stanton Patric K
Boston University School of Medicine and College of Engineering, 670 Albany Street, 4th Floor, Boston 02118, MA, USA ; Boston University Alzheimer's Disease Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Robinson Hall, 7th Floor, Boston 02118, MA, USA.
Boston University Alzheimer's Disease Center, Boston University School of Medicine, Robinson Hall, 7th Floor, Boston 02118, MA, USA ; US Department of Veterans Affairs, VA Boston Healthcare System, 150 South Huntington Avenue, Boston 02130, MA, USA.
Alzheimers Res Ther. 2014 Sep 5;6(5):64. doi: 10.1186/s13195-014-0064-3. eCollection 2014.
The association of military blast exposure and brain injury was first appreciated in World War I as commotio cerebri, and later as shell shock. Similar injuries sustained in modern military conflicts are now classified as mild traumatic brain injury (TBI). Recent research has yielded new insights into the mechanisms by which blast exposure leads to acute brain injury and chronic sequelae, including postconcussive syndrome, post-traumatic stress disorder, post-traumatic headache, and chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a tau protein neurodegenerative disease. Impediments to delivery of effective medical care for individuals affected by blast-related TBI include: poor insight into the heterogeneity of neurological insults induced by blast exposure; limited understanding of the mechanisms by which blast exposure injures the brain and triggers sequelae; failure to appreciate interactive injuries that affect frontal lobe function, pituitary regulation, and neurovegetative homeostasis; unknown influence of genetic risk factors, prior trauma, and comorbidities; absence of validated diagnostic criteria and clinical nosology that differentiate clinical endophenotypes; and lack of empirical evidence to guide medical management and therapeutic intervention. While clinicopathological analysis can provide evidence of correlative association, experimental use of animal models remains the primary tool for establishing causal mechanisms of disease. However, the TBI field is confronted by a welter of animal models with varying clinical relevance, thereby impeding scientific coherence and hindering translational progress. Animal models of blast TBI will be far more translationally useful if experimental emphasis focuses on accurate reproduction of clinically relevant endpoints (output) rather than scaled replication of idealized blast shockwaves (input). The utility of an animal model is dependent on the degree to which the model recapitulates pathophysiological mechanisms, neuropathological features, and neurological sequelae observed in the corresponding human disorder. Understanding the purpose of an animal model and the criteria by which experimental results derived from the model are validated are critical components for useful animal modeling. Animal models that reliably demonstrate clinically relevant endpoints will expedite development of new treatments, diagnostics, preventive measures, and rehabilitative strategies for individuals affected by blast TBI and its aftermath.
军事爆炸暴露与脑损伤之间的关联在第一次世界大战时首次被认识到,当时称为脑震荡,后来称为炮弹休克。现代军事冲突中遭受的类似损伤现在被归类为轻度创伤性脑损伤(TBI)。最近的研究对爆炸暴露导致急性脑损伤和慢性后遗症的机制有了新的认识,这些后遗症包括脑震荡后综合征、创伤后应激障碍、创伤后头痛以及慢性创伤性脑病(一种tau蛋白神经退行性疾病)。为爆炸相关TBI患者提供有效医疗护理存在诸多障碍,包括:对爆炸暴露引起的神经损伤异质性认识不足;对爆炸暴露损伤大脑并引发后遗症的机制了解有限;未能认识到影响额叶功能、垂体调节和神经植物稳态的交互性损伤;遗传风险因素、既往创伤和合并症的未知影响;缺乏区分临床内表型的有效诊断标准和临床分类法;以及缺乏指导医疗管理和治疗干预的实证依据。虽然临床病理分析可以提供相关关联的证据,但动物模型的实验应用仍然是确立疾病因果机制的主要工具。然而,TBI领域面临着大量临床相关性各异的动物模型,从而阻碍了科学的连贯性并妨碍了转化进展。如果实验重点聚焦于准确再现临床相关终点(输出)而非理想化爆炸冲击波的比例复制(输入),那么爆炸TBI动物模型在转化方面将更具实用性。动物模型的实用性取决于该模型重现相应人类疾病中观察到的病理生理机制、神经病理特征和神经后遗症的程度。了解动物模型的目的以及验证从该模型得出的实验结果的标准是有用的动物建模的关键组成部分。能够可靠地证明临床相关终点的动物模型将加快为爆炸TBI患者及其后遗症患者开发新的治疗方法、诊断方法、预防措施和康复策略的进程。