Suppr超能文献

在使用体内和计算机模拟数据集进行创伤性脑分析时,两种最大主应变率计算方案之间的差异。

Differences between two maximal principal strain rate calculation schemes in traumatic brain analysis with in-vivo and in-silico datasets.

作者信息

Zhan Xianghao, Zhou Zhou, Liu Yuzhe, Cecchi Nicholas J, Hajiahamemar Marzieh, Zeineh Michael M, Grant Gerald A, Camarillo David

机构信息

Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, CA, 94305, USA.

Department of Bioengineering, Stanford University, CA, 94305, USA; Division of Neuronic Engineering, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm SE-100 44, Sweden.

出版信息

J Biomech. 2025 Jan;179:112456. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.112456. Epub 2024 Dec 5.

Abstract

Brain deformation caused by a head impact leads to traumatic brain injury (TBI). The maximum principal strain (MPS) was used to measure the extent of brain deformation and predict injury, and the recent evidence has indicated that incorporating the maximum principal strain rate (MPSR) and the product of MPS and MPSR, denoted as MPS × SR, enhances the accuracy of TBI prediction. However, ambiguities have arisen about the calculation of MPSR. Two schemes have been utilized: one is to use the time derivative of MPS (MPSR), and another is to use the first eigenvalue of the strain rate tensor (MPSR). Both MPSR and MPSR have been applied in previous studies to predict TBI. To quantify the discrepancies between these two methodologies, we compared them across eight in-vivo and one in-silico head impact datasets and found that 95MPSR was slightly larger than 95MPSR and 95MPS × SR was 4.85 % larger than 95MPS × SR in average. Across every element in all head impacts, the average MPSR was 12.73 % smaller than MPSR, and MPS × SR was 11.95 % smaller than MPS × SR. Furthermore, logistic regression models were trained to predict TBI using MPSR (or MPS × SR), and no significant difference was observed in the predictability. The consequence of misuse of MPSR and MPS × SR thresholds (i.e. compare threshold of 95MPSR with value from 95MPSR to determine if the impact is injurious) was investigated, and the resulting false rates were found to be around 1 %. The evidence suggested that these two methodologies were not significantly different in detecting TBI.

摘要

头部撞击引起的脑变形会导致创伤性脑损伤(TBI)。最大主应变(MPS)用于测量脑变形程度并预测损伤,最近的证据表明,纳入最大主应变率(MPSR)以及MPS与MPSR的乘积(记为MPS×SR)可提高TBI预测的准确性。然而,MPSR的计算出现了一些模糊之处。已采用两种方案:一种是使用MPS的时间导数(MPSR),另一种是使用应变率张量的第一特征值(MPSR)。MPSR和MPSR均已在先前的研究中用于预测TBI。为了量化这两种方法之间的差异,我们在八个体内和一个虚拟头部撞击数据集上对它们进行了比较,发现平均而言,95MPSR略大于95MPSR,95MPS×SR比95MPS×SR大4.85%。在所有头部撞击的每个单元中,平均MPSR比MPSR小12.73%,MPS×SR比MPS×SR小11.95%。此外,使用MPSR(或MPS×SR)训练了逻辑回归模型来预测TBI,在可预测性方面未观察到显著差异。研究了滥用MPSR和MPS×SR阈值的后果(即比较95MPSR的阈值与95MPSR的值以确定撞击是否具有伤害性),发现由此产生的错误率约为1%。证据表明,这两种方法在检测TBI方面没有显著差异。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验