MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393223112 · doi:10.1089/neu.2023.0572

Meningeal Damage and Interface Astroglial Scarring in the Rat Brain Exposed to a Laser-Induced Shock Wave(s)

2024· article· en· W4393223112 on OpenAlexaff
Satoko Kawauchi, Akemi Kono, Yuriko Muramatsu, Grant Hennes, Susumu Tominaga, Yasue Haruyama, Yukari Komuta, Izumi Nishidate, Susumu Matsukuma, Yushan Wang, Shunichi Sato

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neurotrauma · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular Disturbances
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePathologyNeuroscienceShock (circulatory)LaserPsychologyInternal medicinePhysicsOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the past decade, signature clinical neuropathology of blast-induced traumatic brain injury has been under intense debate, but interface astroglial scarring (IAS) seems to be convincing. In this study, we examined whether IAS could be replicated in the rat brain exposed to a laser-induced shock wave(s) (LISW[s]), a tool that can produce a pure shock wave (primary mechanism) without dynamic pressure (tertiary mechanism). Under certain conditions, we observed astroglial scarring in the subpial glial plate (SGP), gray-white matter junctions (GM-WM), ventricular wall (VW), and regions surrounding cortical blood vessels, accurately reproducing clinical IAS. We also observed shock wave impulse-dependent meningeal damage (dural microhemorrhage) in vivo by transcranial near-infrared (NIR) reflectance imaging. Importantly, there were significant correlations between the degree of dural microhemorrhage and the extent of astroglial scarring more than 7 days post-exposure, suggesting an association of meningeal damage with astroglial scarring. The results demonstrated that the primary mechanism alone caused the IAS and meningeal damage, both of which are attributable to acoustic impedance mismatching at multi-layered tissue boundaries. The time course of glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) immunoreactivity depended not only on the LISW conditions but also on the regions. In the SGP, significant increases in GFAP immunoreactivity were observed at 3 days post-exposure, whereas in the GM-WM and VW, GFAP immunoreactivity was not significantly increased before 28 days post-exposure, suggesting different pathological mechanisms. With the high-impulse single exposure or the multiple exposure (low impulse), fibrotic reaction or fibrotic scar formation was observed, in addition to astroglial scarring, in the cortical surface region. Although there are some limitations, this seems to be the first report on the shock-wave-induced IAS rodent model. The model may be useful to explore potential therapeutic approaches for IAS.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeurotraumaSame topicTraumatic Brain Injury and Neurovascular DisturbancesFrench-language works237,207