钝性撞击创伤性脑损伤中的气蚀现象

IF 2.3 3区 工程技术 Q2 ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL Experiments in Fluids Pub Date : 2024-07-17 DOI:10.1007/s00348-024-03853-6
John D. Finan, Thea E. Vogt, Yasaman Samei
{"title":"钝性撞击创伤性脑损伤中的气蚀现象","authors":"John D. Finan,&nbsp;Thea E. Vogt,&nbsp;Yasaman Samei","doi":"10.1007/s00348-024-03853-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses a major public health challenge. No proven therapies for the condition exist so protective equipment that prevents or mitigates these injuries plays a critical role in minimizing the societal burden of this condition. Our ability to optimize protective equipment depends on our capacity to relate the mechanics of head impact events to morbidity and mortality. This capacity, in turn, depends on correctly identifying the mechanisms of injury. For several decades, a controversial theory of TBI biomechanics has attributed important classes of injury to cavitation inside the cranial vault during blunt impact. This theory explains counter-intuitive clinical observations, including the coup–contre-coup pattern of injury. However, it is also difficult to validate experimentally in living subjects. Also, blunt impact TBI is a broad term that covers a range of different head impact events, some of which may be better described by cavitation theory than others. This review surveys what has been learned about cavitation through mathematical modeling, physical modeling, and experimentation with living tissues and places it in context with competing theories of blunt injury biomechanics and recent research activity in the field in an attempt to understand what the theory has to offer the next generation of innovators in TBI biomechanics.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":554,"journal":{"name":"Experiments in Fluids","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00348-024-03853-6.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cavitation in blunt impact traumatic brain injury\",\"authors\":\"John D. Finan,&nbsp;Thea E. Vogt,&nbsp;Yasaman Samei\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00348-024-03853-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses a major public health challenge. No proven therapies for the condition exist so protective equipment that prevents or mitigates these injuries plays a critical role in minimizing the societal burden of this condition. Our ability to optimize protective equipment depends on our capacity to relate the mechanics of head impact events to morbidity and mortality. This capacity, in turn, depends on correctly identifying the mechanisms of injury. For several decades, a controversial theory of TBI biomechanics has attributed important classes of injury to cavitation inside the cranial vault during blunt impact. This theory explains counter-intuitive clinical observations, including the coup–contre-coup pattern of injury. However, it is also difficult to validate experimentally in living subjects. Also, blunt impact TBI is a broad term that covers a range of different head impact events, some of which may be better described by cavitation theory than others. This review surveys what has been learned about cavitation through mathematical modeling, physical modeling, and experimentation with living tissues and places it in context with competing theories of blunt injury biomechanics and recent research activity in the field in an attempt to understand what the theory has to offer the next generation of innovators in TBI biomechanics.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":554,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Experiments in Fluids\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00348-024-03853-6.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Experiments in Fluids\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00348-024-03853-6\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Experiments in Fluids","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00348-024-03853-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MECHANICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

创伤性脑损伤(TBI)是一项重大的公共卫生挑战。目前还没有治疗这种疾病的行之有效的方法,因此能够预防或减轻这些伤害的防护设备在最大限度地减轻这种疾病的社会负担方面发挥着至关重要的作用。我们优化防护设备的能力取决于我们将头部撞击事件的机理与发病率和死亡率联系起来的能力。反过来,这种能力又取决于正确识别损伤机制的能力。几十年来,一种有争议的创伤性脑损伤生物力学理论一直将重要的几类损伤归因于钝性撞击时颅穹内的空化。这一理论解释了反直觉的临床观察结果,包括 "政变-反政变 "损伤模式。然而,该理论也很难在活体实验中得到验证。此外,钝性撞击创伤是一个宽泛的术语,涵盖了一系列不同的头部撞击事件,其中一些可能更适合用空化理论来描述。本综述调查了通过数学建模、物理建模和活体组织实验对空化理论的了解,并将其与钝伤生物力学的竞争理论和该领域的最新研究活动相结合,试图了解该理论能为创伤性脑损伤生物力学的下一代创新者提供什么。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cavitation in blunt impact traumatic brain injury

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) poses a major public health challenge. No proven therapies for the condition exist so protective equipment that prevents or mitigates these injuries plays a critical role in minimizing the societal burden of this condition. Our ability to optimize protective equipment depends on our capacity to relate the mechanics of head impact events to morbidity and mortality. This capacity, in turn, depends on correctly identifying the mechanisms of injury. For several decades, a controversial theory of TBI biomechanics has attributed important classes of injury to cavitation inside the cranial vault during blunt impact. This theory explains counter-intuitive clinical observations, including the coup–contre-coup pattern of injury. However, it is also difficult to validate experimentally in living subjects. Also, blunt impact TBI is a broad term that covers a range of different head impact events, some of which may be better described by cavitation theory than others. This review surveys what has been learned about cavitation through mathematical modeling, physical modeling, and experimentation with living tissues and places it in context with competing theories of blunt injury biomechanics and recent research activity in the field in an attempt to understand what the theory has to offer the next generation of innovators in TBI biomechanics.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Experiments in Fluids
Experiments in Fluids 工程技术-工程:机械
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
12.50%
发文量
157
审稿时长
3.8 months
期刊介绍: Experiments in Fluids examines the advancement, extension, and improvement of new techniques of flow measurement. The journal also publishes contributions that employ existing experimental techniques to gain an understanding of the underlying flow physics in the areas of turbulence, aerodynamics, hydrodynamics, convective heat transfer, combustion, turbomachinery, multi-phase flows, and chemical, biological and geological flows. In addition, readers will find papers that report on investigations combining experimental and analytical/numerical approaches.
期刊最新文献
Roughness-induced transition and turbulent wedge spreading Starting jets in non-Newtonian viscoelastic fluids: on vortex ring generation and behavior Quantitative near-field water–air spray measurements at elevated pressures by neutron radiography imaging Double refractive particle tracking and sizing Enhanced three-dimensional particle detection in microcirculation experiments with defocus particle tracking and ghost red blood cells
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1