Traumatic Brain Injury: An Update

El Rasheid Zakaria, Bellal Joseph

Department of Surgery, The University of Arizona, College of Medicine, Division of Trauma, Critical Care, Burns & Emergency Surgery, Tucson, AZ, USAUnited States

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17140/sroj-4-e003 · Published 2017-09-12 · Licence: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 · © 2017 The Author(s)

Also available as PDF (figures and tables appear in the PDF).

Keywords: Traumatic brain injury (TBI); United States; injury

http://dx.doi.org/10.17140/SROJ-4-e003 ISSN 2377-8407 Traumatic Brain Injury: An Update El Rasheid Zakaria, MD, PhD*; Bellal Joseph, MD, FACS Department of Surgery, The University of Arizona, College of Medicine, Division of Trauma, Critical Care, Burns & Emergency Surgery, Tucson, AZ, USA *Corresponding author El Rasheid Zakaria, MD, PhD Research Assistant Professor Department of Surgery Division of Trauma, Critical Care, Burns and Emergency Surgery The University of Arizona College of Medicine Tucson, AZ, USA Tel. +520- 626-9010 E-mail: drelzak@surgery.arizona.edu Article History Received: September 8th, 2017 Accepted: September 11th, 2017 Published: September 12th, 2017 Citation Zakaria ER, Joseph B. Traumatic brain injury: An update. Surg Res Open J. 2017; 4(1): e1-e5. doi: 10.17140/SROJ-4-e003 Copyright ©2017 Zakaria ER. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Volume 4 : Issue 1 Article Ref. #: 1000SROJ4e003 Editorial Page e1 Traumatic brain injury (TBI) remains one of the leading causes of trauma-related mortality and morbidity in the United States. 1 An estimated 2.5 million TBI occur annually resulting in 282,000 hospitalization and 50,000 deaths with an estimated economic burden of $141 billion.2 While TBI accounts for 30% of all injury related deaths, survivors face physical and cognitive disabilities together with an increasing risk for neurodegenerative diseases and lasting effects on the individual, the family and the community. The association between TBI and depression, aggressive behavior, attention and memory deficits, cognitive deficit, suicide, premature death, progressive dementia, seizures and even neurodegenerative diseases is well founded.3-6 Primary TBI sets a series of compensatory adjustments including stress and inflam- matory responses largely driven by hypoxia and ischemia to cause secondary brain injury. This injury occurs hours to days after the primary insult and manifests as systemic hypertension, intracranial hypertension, cerebral edema, and hypo-perfusion. With the pre-existing primary injury, the secondary brain injury contributes to the mortality and morbidity of TBI.7 Therefore, the quality of the clinical recovery after TBI depends on the severity of the primary insult, the presence or absence of a TBI-associated coagulopathy and the prevalence, sustainability and progression of the secondary brain injury. 8-11 The direct mechanical brain injury is generally expressed as concussion, contusion, intracranial hemorrhage, or diffuse axonal injury. This primary brain injury cannot be influenced therapeutically, and therefore, the main goal of TBI management is to minimize and halt the progression of the secondary brain injury. Although, guidelines have been established for the management of TBI, the optimal therapeutic manage- ment of secondary brain injury in TBI patients remains unclear.12 Also, since the publication of the Brain Trauma Foundation (BTF) guidelines a decade ago, today’s TBI management has not changed significantly and still comprise of tiered management of intracranial pressure (ICP) using sedation, hyperosmolar therapy, and/or craniotomy.

Surgical management of TBI is often a life-saving intervention particularly for mass lesion evacuation; neurosurgical decompression to control an ICP that is refractory to medical treatment or an intractable cerebral hypertension; and in some cases, a depressed skull fracture that is compounded by gross contamination or infection, or by disruption of the dura mater that results in pneumocephalus or an underlying hematoma. Although, there is no consensus as to the optimal timing to intervene surgically, and which surgical technique to use, the neurosurgi- cal techniques that are commonly used in TBI are craniotomy, burr holes operation and crani- ectomy.13,14 Secondary brain injury results from delayed biochemical, metabolic, immunologic, and cellular changes that are triggered by the primary TBI. As this injury is amenable to thera- peutic intervention, preclinical research has focused in the development and discovery of po- tentially effective neuroprotective agents. Specifically, this effort has focused on the mitigation of the role of various pathways involved in the pathogenesis of the secondary brain injury.

Among others, the potential neuroprotective roles of calcium-channel antagonists13; steroids14; N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) antagonists15,16; glutamate agonists17; oxygen free-radical scav- engers18; immune-modulators19,20; statins21; progesterone22,23; and hypothermia24 were evaluated. Although, most of these developmental neuroprotective agents have shown promising results in the preclinical evaluation phase, their translations for clinical use have been disappointing.13,25,26 Page e2 This is likely to be explained by the complexity of the pathophysiology of TBI and the inability of these developmental agents to modulate the single critical element in the pathogenesis of secondary brain injury, which is cerebral blood flow. The brain has the lowest tolerance to ischemic-hypoxia, making it vulnerable to injury and loss of function even at a relative ischemia due to fluctua- tions in cerebral blood flow. TBI invariably decreases cerebral blood flow by altering one or more of the mechanisms that regulate and optimize a steady cerebral blood flow to meet neuronal functions and metabolic demands. 27 Preclinical as well as clinical data confirm that TBI-induced neurovascular uncoupling, cerebral blood flow-metabolism uncoupling, and impaired cerebral blood flow autoregulation are determinants of the clinical outcome after TBI.27-31 Based on this premise, interventions that selectively restore a steady cerebral blood flow are more likely to be effective neuroprotective agents against the secondary brain injury. Procedures that can directly influence cerebral blood flow after TBI are: 1) remote ischemic conditioning (RIC); and 2) β-adrenoceptors blockade. Remote ischemic conditioning (RIC) is a procedure in which non-injured tissues are subjected to short cycles of non-lethal ischemia and reperfusion in order to exert protection against ischemia reperfusion injury in remote tissues/organs. RIC is easy to apply, safe, non-invasive and cost effective intervention, which can be applied in pre-hospital settings or dur - ing transport. RIC activates the body’s natural protective pathways against the tissue damage caused by low oxygen levels (ischemia) and reperfusion. 32 The molecular mechanisms underlying the protective effect of RIC are not fully understood, but thought to involve complex interactions of intrinsic protective pathways and mediators, protein transporters and ion channels. 33-39 Brief cycles of non-lethal ischemia and reperfusion in the non-injured organ generate endogenous factors that can protect the target (remote) organs from injury. The transmission of this protective signal is multifactorial, comprising of blood-borne factors, neuronal mechanisms and systemic responses. These then activates a cascade of events in the target organ or tissue, which confers the protective effect. Although, the protective effects of RIC were first demonstrated in acute myocar - dial infarction, its beneficial effects are also observed in other organs like the lung, the liver, the kidney. 40-42 Recent advances in neurosciences have explored the use of RIC in non-traumatic brain disorders like aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage and ischemic stroke and have shown promising results. 43-46 Joseph and colleagues conducted the first-in-humans randomized trial on RIC in patients with severe TBI.47 The study demonstrated that specific neuronal markers of TBI such as S100B and NSE were significantly reduced in patients who underwent brief periods of RIC upon arrival in the ED.

TBI sets in motion a host-adaptive neuroendocrine, immune, metabolic and inflammatory response that is integrated by increased sympathetic drive and exaggerated catecholamine surge. An unopposed host stress response exaggerates inflam- mation, impairs host immunity, and accelerates metabolism and tissue injury, which constitute a secondary brain injury. The concept of opposing this host stress response through neutralization of the catecholamine actions early after TBI is a viable option for neuroprotection against the secondary brain injury. Numerous preclinical studies, retrospective reviews, and meta- analysis data have confirmed the beneficial effects of β-adrenoceptors blockade in the management of TBI. 48-57 In particular, studies have shown that β-Blockers improve in-hospital survival of TBI patients.

Management of TBI is changing towards a personalized approach of early diagnosis, early assessment of associated risk factors that contribute to morbidity and mortality, and early interventions to protect neurons against further damage. Pre- clinical studies are required to elaborate on the pathophysiology of TBI, and in particular, the pathogenesis of the secondary brain injury that is associated with TBI. Prospective evidence on the short- and long-term benefits of RIC and β-Blockers in the management of TBI is warranted.

References

1. CDC Report. Traumatic Brain Injury in the United States: Emergency Department Visits, Hospitalizations and Deaths 2002-2006 (Blue Book). 2010. Web site. https://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/tbi_ed.html. Accessed September 7, 2017
2. TaylorCABellJMBreidingMJXuL. Traumatic brain injury-related emergency department visits, hospitalizations, and deaths-United States, 2007 and 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2017 66(9): 1-16. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss6609a110.15585/mmwr.ss6609a1 https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.ss6609a1
3. BarnesDEKaupAKirbyKAByersALDiaz-ArrastiaRYaffeK. Traumatic brain injury and risk of dementia in older veterans. Neurology. 2014; 83(4): 312-319. doi: 10.1212/WNL.000000000000061610.1212/wnl.0000000000000616 https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000000616
4. HutsonCBLazoCRMortazaviFGizaCCHovdaDChesseletMF. Traumatic brain injury in adult rats causes progressive nigrostriatal dopaminergic cell loss and enhanced vulnerability to the pesticide paraquat. J Neurotrauma. 2011; 28(9): 1783-1801. doi: 10.1089/neu.2010.172310.1089/neu.2010.1723 https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2010.1723
5. MolloyCConroyRMCotterDRCannonM. Is traumatic brain injury a risk factor for schizophrenia? A meta-analysis of casecontrolled population-based studies. Schizophr Bull. 2011 37(6): 1104-1110. doi: 10.1093/schbul/sbr091 Page e310.1093/schbul/sbr091 https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbr091
6. WebsterKMSunMCrackPO’BrienTJShultzSRSempleBD. Inflammation in epileptogenesis after traumatic brain injury. J Neuroinflammation. 2017; 14(1): 10. doi: 10.1186/s12974-016-0786-110.1186/s12974-016-0786-1 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12974-016-0786-1
7. WernerCEngelhardK. Pathophysiology of traumatic brain injury. Br J Anaesth. 2007; 99(1): 4-9. doi: 10.1093/bja/aem13110.1093/bja/aem131 https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aem131
8. HarhangiBSKompanjeEJLeebeekFWMaasAI. Coagulation disorders after traumatic brain injury. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2008; 150(2): 165-175. doi: 10.1007/s00701-007-1475-810.1007/s00701-007-1475-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-007-1475-8
9. UzzellBPDolinskasCAWiserRF. Relation between intracranial pressure, computed tomographic lesion, and neuropsychological outcome. Adv Neurol. 1990; 52: 269-274
10. UzzellBPDolinskasCAWiserRFLangfittTW. Influence of lesions detected by computed tomography on outcome and neuropsychological recovery after severe head injury. Neurosurgery. 1987; 20(3): 396-402. doi: 10.1227/00006123-198703000-0000710.1227/00006123-198703000-00007 https://doi.org/10.1227/00006123-198703000-00007
11. BadriSChenJBarberJ. Mortality and long-term functional outcome associated with intracranial pressure after traumatic brain injury. Intensive Care Med. 2012; 38(11): 1800-1809. doi: 10.1007/s00134-012-2655-410.1007/s00134-012-2655-4 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-012-2655-4
12. ChesnutRMTemkinNCarneyN. A trial of intracranial-pressure monitoring in traumatic brain injury. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367 (26): 2471-2481. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa120736310.1056/nejmoa1207363 https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1207363
13. McConeghyKWHattonJHughesLCookAM. A review of neuroprotection pharmacology and therapies in patients with acute traumatic brain injury. CNS Drugs. 2012; 26(7): 613-636. doi: 10.2165/11634020-000000000-0000010.2165/11634020-000000000-00000 https://doi.org/10.2165/11634020-000000000-00000
14. CooperPRMoodySClarkWK. Dexamethasone and severe head injury. A prospective double-blind study. J Neurosurg. 1979; 51(3): 307-316. doi: 10.3171/jns.1979.51.3.030710.3171/jns.1979.51.3.0307 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1979.51.3.0307
15. KabadiSVFadenAI. Neuroprotective strategies for traumatic brain injury: Improving clinical translation. Int J Mol Sci. 2014; 15(1): 1216-1236. doi: 10.3390/ijms1501121610.3390/ijms15011216 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms15011216
16. McIntoshTKVinkRSoaresHHayesRSimonR. Effects of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor blocker MK-801 on neurologic function after experimental brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 1989; 6(4): 247-259. doi: 10.1089/neu.1989.6.24710.1089/neu.1989.6.247 https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.1989.6.247
17. FeiZZhangXBaiHMJiangXFWangXL. Metabotropic glutamate receptor antagonists and agonists: Potential neuroprotectors in diffuse brain injury. J Clin Neurosci. 2006; 13(10): 1023-1027. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2005.11.04210.1016/j.jocn.2005.11.042 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocn.2005.11.042
18. MarshallLFMaasAIMarshallSB. A multicenter trial on the efficacy of using tirilazad mesylate in cases of head injury. J Neurosurg. 1998; 89(4): 519-525. doi: 10.3171/jns.1998.89.4.051910.3171/jns.1998.89.4.0519 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1998.89.4.0519
19. CookAMWhitlowJHattonJYoungB. Cyclosporine A for neuroprotection: Establishing dosing guidelines for safe and effective use. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2009; 8(4): 411-419. doi: 10.1517/1474033090306674210.1517/14740330903066742 https://doi.org/10.1517/14740330903066742
20. HattonJRosboltBEmpeyPKryscioRYoungB. Dosing and safety of cyclosporine in patients with severe brain injury. J Neurosurg. 2008; 109(4): 699-707. doi: 10.3171/JNS/2008/109/10/069910.3171/jns/2008/109/10/0699 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns/2008/109/10/0699
21. WibleEFLaskowitzDT. Statins in traumatic brain injury. Neurotherapeutics. 2010; 7(1): 62-73. doi: 10.1016/j.nurt.2009.11.00310.1016/j.nurt.2009.11.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nurt.2009.11.003
22. SteinDG. Is progesterone a worthy candidate as a novel therapy for traumatic brain injury? Dialogues Clin Neurosci. 2011 13(3): 352-359
23. SteinDGWrightDWKellermannAL. Does progesterone have neuroprotective properties? Ann Emerg Med. 2008; 51(2): 164- 172. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.05.00110.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.05.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.05.001
24. BustoRDietrichWDGlobusMYGinsbergMD. Postischemic moderate hypothermia inhibits CA1 hippocampal ischemic neuronal injury. Neurosci Lett. 1989; 101(3): 299-304. doi: 10.1016/0304-3940(89)90549-110.1016/0304-3940(89)90549-1 https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3940(89)90549-1
25. ChakrabortySSkolnickBNarayanRK. Neuroprotection trials in traumatic brain injury. Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep. 2016; 16 (4): 29. doi: 10.1007/s11910-016-0625-x10.1007/s11910-016-0625-x https://doi.org/10.1007/s11910-016-0625-x
26. SchoutenJW. Neuroprotection in traumatic brain injury: A complex struggle against the biology of nature. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2007; 13(2): 134-142. doi 10.1097/MCC.0b013e3280895d5c10.1097/mcc.0b013e3280895d5c https://doi.org/10.1097/mcc.0b013e3280895d5c
27. Tan CO, Meehan WP, III, Iverson GL, Taylor JA. Cerebrovascular regulation, exercise, and mild traumatic brain injury. Neurology. 2014 83(18): 1665-1672. doi: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000000944 https://doi.org/10.1212/wnl.0000000000000944
28. HarrisJLYehHWChoiIY. Altered neurochemical profile after traumatic brain injury: (1)H-MRS biomarkers of pathological mechanisms. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2012; 32(12): 2122-2134. doi: 10.1038/jcbfm.2012.11410.1038/jcbfm.2012.114 https://doi.org/10.1038/jcbfm.2012.114
29. HarrisNGMironovaYAChenSFRichardsHKPickardJD. Preventing flow-metabolism uncoupling acutely reduces axonal injury after traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2012; 29(7): 1469-1482. doi: 10.1089/neu.2011.216110.1089/neu.2011.2161 https://doi.org/10.1089/neu.2011.2161
30. LamJMHsiangJNPoonWS. Monitoring of autoregulation using laser Doppler flowmetry in patients with head injury. J Neurosurg. 1997; 86(3): 438-445. doi: 10.3171/jns.1997.86.3.043810.3171/jns.1997.86.3.0438 https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1997.86.3.0438
31. RichardsHKSimacSPiechnikSPickardJD. Uncoupling of cerebral blood flow and metabolism after cerebral contusion in the rat. J Cereb Blood Flow Metab. 2001; 21(7): 779-781. doi: 10.1097/00004647-200107000-0000210.1097/00004647-200107000-00002 https://doi.org/10.1097/00004647-200107000-00002
32. HeuschG. Molecular basis of cardioprotection: Signal transduction in ischemic pre-, post-, and remote conditioning. Circ Res 116(4): 674-699, 2015. doi: 10.1161/CIRCRESAHA.116.30534810.1161/circresaha.116.305348 https://doi.org/10.1161/circresaha.116.305348
33. HausenloyDJYellonDM. Preconditioning and postconditioning: Underlying mechanisms and clinical application. Atherosclerosis. 2009; 204(2): 334-341. doi: 10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2008.10.02910.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2008.10.029 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2008.10.029
34. KanoriaSJalanRSeifalianAMWilliamsRDavidsonBR. Protocols and mechanisms for remote ischemic preconditioning: A novel method for reducing ischemia reperfusion injury. Transplantation. 2007; 84(4): 445-458. doi: 10.1097/01.tp.0000228235.5541910.1097/01.tp.0000228235.55419 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.tp.0000228235.55419
35. SharmaRRandhawaPKSinghNJaggiAS. Bradykinin in ischemic conditioning-induced tissue protection: Evidences and possible mechanisms. Eur J Pharmacol. 2015; 768: 58-70. doi: 10.1016/j.ejphar.2015.10.02910.1016/j.ejphar.2015.10.029 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejphar.2015.10.029
36. TapuriaNKumarYHabibMMAbuAMSeifalianAMDavidsonBR. Remote ischemic preconditioning: A novel protective method from ischemia reperfusion injury--a review. J Surg Res. 2008; 150(2): 304-330. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2007.12.74710.1016/j.jss.2007.12.747 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2007.12.747
37. TurrellHEThaitirarotCCrumbieHRodrigoG. Remote ischemic preconditioning of cardiomyocytes inhibits the mitochondrial permeability transition pore independently of reduced calcium-loading or sarcKATP channel activation. Physiol Rep. 2014; 2(11): e12231. doi: 10.14814/phy2.1223110.14814/phy2.12231 https://doi.org/10.14814/phy2.12231
38. Jose Alburquerque-Bejar J, Barba I, Valls-Lacalle L, et al. Remote ischemic conditioning provides humoural cross-species cardioprotection through glycine receptor activation. Cardiovasc Res. 113(1): 52-60. doi: 10.1093/cvr/cvw242 https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvw242
39. CuomoOVinciguerraACerulloP. Ionic homeostasis in brain conditioning. 2015; Front Neurosci. 9: 277. doi: 10.3389/ fnins.2015.00277
40. KanoriaSJalanRDaviesNASeifalianAMWilliamsRDavidsonBR. Remote ischaemic preconditioning of the hind limb reduces experimental liver warm ischaemia-reperfusion injury. Br J Surg. 2006; 93(6): 762-768. doi: 10.1002/bjs.533110.1002/bjs.5331 https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.5331
41. Kierulf-LassenCKristensenMLBirnHJespersenBNorregaardR. No effect of remote ischemic conditioning strategies on recovery from renal ischemia-reperfusion injury and protective molecular mediators. PLoS One. 2015; 10(12): e0146109. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.014610910.1371/journal.pone.0146109 https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0146109
42. KonoYFukudaSHanataniA. Remote ischemic conditioning improves coronary microcirculation in healthy subjects and patients with heart failure. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2014; 8: 1175-1181. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S6871510.2147/dddt.s68715 https://doi.org/10.2147/dddt.s68715
43. EnglandTJHedstromAO’SullivanS. RECAST (Remote Ischemic Conditioning After Stroke Trial): A pilot randomized Page e4 placebo controlled phase II trial in acute ischemic stroke. Stroke. 2017; 48(5): 1412-1415. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.01642910.1161/strokeaha.116.016429 https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.116.016429
44. GonzalezNRConnollyMDusickJRBhaktaHVespaP. Phase I clinical trial for the feasibility and safety of remote ischemic conditioning for aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage. Neurosurgery. 2014; 75(5): 590-598. doi: 10.1227/NEU.000000000000051410.1227/neu.0000000000000514 https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000000514
45. KochSKatsnelsonMDongCPerez-PinzonM. Remote ischemic limb preconditioning after subarachnoid hemorrhage: A phase Ib study of safety and feasibility. Stroke. 2011; 42(5): 1387-1391. doi: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.110.60584010.1161/strokeaha.110.605840 https://doi.org/10.1161/strokeaha.110.605840
46. TuluSMulinoMPinggeraD. Remote ischemic preconditioning in the prevention of ischemic brain damage during intracranial aneurysm treatment (RIPAT): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Trials. 2015; 16: 594. doi: 10.1186/ s13063-015-1102-6
47. JosephBPanditVZangbarB. Secondary brain injury in trauma patients: The effects of remote ischemic conditioning. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015; 78(4): 698-703. doi: 10.1097/TA.000000000000058410.1097/ta.0000000000000584 https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0000000000000584
48. Alali AS, Mukherjee K, McCredie V A, et al. Beta-blockers and traumatic brain injury: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and Eastern Association for the surgery of trauma guideline. Ann Surg. 2017; doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000002286 https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000002286
49. ChenZTangLXuXWeiXWenLXieQ. Therapeutic effect of beta-blocker in patients with traumatic brain injury: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Crit Care. 2017; 41: 240-246. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2017.05.03510.1016/j.jcrc.2017.05.035 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrc.2017.05.035
50. KotaDJPrabhakaraKSvan BrummenAJ. Propranolol and mesenchymal stromal cells combine to treat traumatic brain injury. Stem Cells Transl Med. 2016; 5(1): 33-44. doi: 10.5966/sctm.2015-006510.5966/sctm.2015-0065 https://doi.org/10.5966/sctm.2015-0065
51. LeyEJScehnetJParkR. The in vivo effect of propranolol on cerebral perfusion and hypoxia after traumatic brain injury. J Trauma. 2009; 66(1): 154-159. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e31819388be10.1097/ta.0b013e31819388be https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0b013e31819388be
52. LeyEJClondMABukurM. Beta-adrenergic receptor inhibition affects cerebral glucose metabolism, motor perfor mance, and inflammatory response after traumatic brain injury. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2012; 73(1): 33-40. doi: 10.1097/ TA.0b013e31825a769b
53. LiuMY. Protective effects of propranolol on experimentally head-injured mouse brains. J Formos Med Assoc. 1995; 94(7): 386-390
54. LoftusTJEfronPAMoldawerLLMohrAM. Beta-blockade use for traumatic injuries and immunomodulation: A review of proposed mechanisms and clinical evidence. Shock. 2016; 46(4): 341-351. doi: 10.1097/SHK.000000000000063610.1097/shk.0000000000000636 https://doi.org/10.1097/shk.0000000000000636
55. MohseniSTalvingPThelinEPWallinGLjungqvistORiddezL. The Effect of beta-blockade on survival after isolated severe traumatic brain injury. World J Surg. 2015; 39(8): 2076-2083. doi: 10.1007/s00268-015-3039-z10.1007/s00268-015-3039-z https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-015-3039-z
56. MurryJSHoangDMBarmparasG. Prospective evaluation of early propranolol after traumatic brain injury. J Surg Res. 2016; 200(1): 221-226. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2015.06.04510.1016/j.jss.2015.06.045 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2015.06.045
57. SchroeppelTJFischerPEZarzaurBL. Beta-adrenergic blockade and traumatic brain injury: Protective? J Trauma. 2010; 69(4): 776-782. doi: 10.1097/TA.0b013e3181e981b8 Page e510.1097/ta.0b013e3181e981b8 https://doi.org/10.1097/ta.0b013e3181e981b8