scholarly journals Simple Prognostic Scale for Traumatic Brain Injury Patients without Neurosurgical Treatment

2018 ◽  
Vol 07 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
Agnieszka Korchut ◽  
Sebastian Szklener ◽  
Marcin Majewski ◽  
Wojciech Załuska ◽  
Robert Rejdak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Neurosurgical Treatment

scholarly journals What Is the Incidence of Intracranial Bleeding in Patients with Mild Traumatic Brain Injury? A Retrospective Study in 3088 Canadian CT Head Rule Patients

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. E. Albers ◽  
M. von Allmen ◽  
D. S. Evangelopoulos ◽  
A. K. Zisakis ◽  
H. Zimmermann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Mild Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors ◽  
Intracranial Bleeding ◽  
Limited Data ◽  
Neurosurgical Treatment ◽  
Clinical Surveillance ◽  
Aggregation Inhibitors ◽  
Ct Head

Objective. Only limited data exists in terms of the incidence of intracranial bleeding (ICB) in patients with mild traumatic brain injury (MTBI).Methods. We retrospectively identified 3088 patients (mean age 41 range (7–99) years) presenting with isolated MTBI and GCS 14-15 at our Emergency Department who had undergone cranial CT (CCT) between 2002 and 2011. Indication for CCT was according to the “Canadian CT head rules.” Patients with ICB were either submitted for neurosurgical treatment or kept under surveillance for at least 24 hours. Pearson’s correlation coefficient was used to correlate the incidence of ICB with age, gender, or intake of coumarins, platelet aggregation inhibitors, or heparins.Results. 149 patients (4.8%) had ICB on CCT. No patient with ICB died or deteriorated neurologically. The incidence of ICB increased with age and intake of anticoagulants without clinically relevant correlation (R=0.11;P<0.001;R=-0.06;P<0.001).Conclusion. Our data show an incidence of 4.8% for ICB after MTBI. However, neurological deterioration after MTBI seems to be rare, and the need for neurosurgical intervention is only required in selected cases. The general need for CCT in patients after MTBI is therefore questionable, and clinical surveillance may be sufficient when CCT is not available.

The factors of the outcome of neurosurgical treatment in traumatic brain injury

2021 ◽  
pp. 511-517
Author(s):  
Keneshbek Bakirbaevich Yrysov ◽  
Doolos Muratovich Muratov ◽  
Gulzar Zhakypovna Alibaeva ◽  
Talant Suyorkulovich Kalykov
Keyword(s):  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Glasgow Coma Scale ◽  
Deep Coma ◽  
Brain Contusion ◽  
Coma Scale ◽  
Patients Âgés ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Neurosurgical Treatment ◽  
Age Over 60

The purpose of the research: to improve the results of neurosurgical treatment in patients with traumatic brain injury by detecting an optimal way of craniotomy. Material and methods. The study includes the analysis of 127 patients operated on in the Department of Neurosurgery. The examination sample consisted of 109 (85.8%) male and 18 (14.2%) female patients. Patients’ ages varied from 16 to 85 years. The average age of the patients was 43.8 ± 4.2 years. Results. Not depending on craniotomy method, there was not a statistically significant difference in outcome in patients with traumatic brain injury. Using of trephination, craniectomy and osteoplastic craniotomy revealed no significant differences in outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury. Patients’ age over 60 years, consciousness degree 4-6 scores according to Glasgow Coma Scale, and dislocation syndrome are unfavorable prognostic factors. Resection craniotomy in traumatic brain injury may be effective even in deep coma consciousness level and dislocation syndrome, but in absence of intraoperative brain edema. Conclusion. During the planning of craniotomy method in traumatic brain injury, 4-9 score consciousness degree according to Glasgow Coma Scale, brain contusion foci, acute subdural and intracerebral hematomas, brain compression volume of 30-150 cm³, patient’ age and dislocation syndrome should be considered, which, in total, predicts an outcome.

scholarly journals Complex neuroimaging of traumatic brain injury: Magnetic resonance imaging

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 239-244
Author(s):  
A. V. Yarikov ◽  
I. A. Lobanov ◽  
V. A. Leonov ◽  
A. P. Fraerman ◽  
S. V. Nikolenko
Keyword(s):  
Magnetic Resonance Imaging ◽  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Magnetic Resonance ◽  
Diffusion Tensor ◽  
Resonance Imaging ◽  
Correct Treatment ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Neurosurgical Treatment ◽  
The Right

Traumatic brain injury is one of the most frequent types of injuries and ranks first among the causes of mortality and disability of the working population. The timely diagnosis of brain damage is one of the ways of improving the quality of emergency neurosurgical treatment of severe traumatic brain injury. Choosing the right diagnostic method allows you to assess the volume, severity of the injury and apply the correct treatment tactics. This paper describes in detail the special methods of magnetic resonance imaging used in the diagnosis of traumatic brain injury (MR cisternography, perfusion MRI, MR spectroscopy, diffusion-weighted and diffusion tensor MRI). The diagnostic capabilities, advantages and disadvantages of each method are discussed.

Cognitive control constrains memory attributions

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colleen M. Kelley ◽  
Larry L. Jacoby
Keyword(s):  
Alzheimer’S Disease ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Alzheimer's Disease ◽  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Cognitive Control

Abstract Cognitive control constrains retrieval processing and so restricts what comes to mind as input to the attribution system. We review evidence that older adults, patients with Alzheimer's disease, and people with traumatic brain injury exert less cognitive control during retrieval, and so are susceptible to memory misattributions in the form of dramatic levels of false remembering.

Lessons Learned From Coaching Postsecondary Students With Traumatic Brain Injury

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 88-96
Author(s):  
Mary R. T. Kennedy
Keyword(s):  
College Students ◽  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Sense Of Self ◽  
Scientific Evidence ◽  
Sudden Onset ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Exhaustive List

Purpose The purpose of this clinical focus article is to provide speech-language pathologists with a brief update of the evidence that provides possible explanations for our experiences while coaching college students with traumatic brain injury (TBI). Method The narrative text provides readers with lessons we learned as speech-language pathologists functioning as cognitive coaches to college students with TBI. This is not meant to be an exhaustive list, but rather to consider the recent scientific evidence that will help our understanding of how best to coach these college students. Conclusion Four lessons are described. Lesson 1 focuses on the value of self-reported responses to surveys, questionnaires, and interviews. Lesson 2 addresses the use of immediate/proximal goals as leverage for students to update their sense of self and how their abilities and disabilities may alter their more distal goals. Lesson 3 reminds us that teamwork is necessary to address the complex issues facing these students, which include their developmental stage, the sudden onset of trauma to the brain, and having to navigate going to college with a TBI. Lesson 4 focuses on the need for college students with TBI to learn how to self-advocate with instructors, family, and peers.

The Speech-Language Pathologists' Role in Mild Traumatic Brain Injury for Middle and High School–Age Children: Viewpoints on Guidelines From the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 1363-1370 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jessica Brown ◽  
Katy O'Brien ◽  
Kelly Knollman-Porter ◽  
Tracey Wallace
Keyword(s):  
High School ◽  
Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
Brain Injury ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Mild Traumatic Brain Injury ◽  
School Age Children ◽  
School Age ◽  
Speech Language Pathologists ◽  
Control And Prevention ◽  
Centers For Disease Control

Purpose The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently released guidelines for rehabilitation professionals regarding the care of children with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). Given that mTBI impacts millions of children each year and can be particularly detrimental to children in middle and high school age groups, access to universal recommendations for management of postinjury symptoms is ideal. Method This viewpoint article examines the CDC guidelines and applies these recommendations directly to speech-language pathology practices. In particular, education, assessment, treatment, team management, and ongoing monitoring are discussed. In addition, suggested timelines regarding implementation of services by speech-language pathologists (SLPs) are provided. Specific focus is placed on adolescents (i.e., middle and high school–age children). Results SLPs are critical members of the rehabilitation team working with children with mTBI and should be involved in education, symptom monitoring, and assessment early in the recovery process. SLPs can also provide unique insight into the cognitive and linguistic challenges of these students and can serve to bridge the gap among rehabilitation and school-based professionals, the adolescent with brain injury, and their parents. Conclusion The guidelines provided by the CDC, along with evidence from the field of speech pathology, can guide SLPs to advocate for involvement in the care of adolescents with mTBI. More research is needed to enhance the evidence base for direct assessment and treatment with this population; however, SLPs can use their extensive knowledge and experience working with individuals with traumatic brain injury as a starting point for post-mTBI care.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document