Skip to main content

Physical Models: Organ Models for Primary Blast

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Blast Injury Science and Engineering

Abstract

With primary blast, when a shock wave hits the body, some of the energy is reflected and some absorbed by the body. As tissue within the body possesses both elastic and viscous properties (as well as some organs being multi-phasic in nature), their reactions to blast loading is complicated and difficult to predict. Different parts of the body, specifically organs, react differently to impulsive loading. This is due to a combination of their unique structure, which responds in a certain way to a mechanical stimulus, as well as the unique stress-strain state experienced in that part of the body, due to a given blast wave profile and the support conditions of that organ. This can lead to local injury development within a given organ resulting in consequences to the system as a whole (e.g. inflammation) or with damage mechanisms being interwoven and superposing. Multiple injury sites generate increased burden on the system leading to added complications in their treatment. Although in-vivo blast models continue to dominate the existing literature, these models tend to analyse whole body responses and sometimes fail to identify physical injury at the tissue level. Isolated organ experiments, termed ex-vivo models, maintain the architecture and functionality of the tissue for a short period of time and constitute a close representation of the in-vivo state [1]. This section focusses on the work assessing primary blast evaluation of the body at an organ level.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 99.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 129.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Connell S, Gao J, Chen J, Shi R. Novel model to investigate blast injury in the central nervous system. J Neurotrauma. 2011;28:1229–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Duckworth JL, Grimes J, Ling GSF. Pathophysiology of battlefield associated traumatic brain injury. Pathophysiology. 2013;20:23–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Courtney A, Courtney M. A thoracic mechanism of mild traumatic brain injury due to blast pressure waves. Med Hypotheses. 2009;72(1):76–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Sundaramurthy A, Alai A, Ganpule S, Holmberg A, Plougonven E, Chandra N. Blast-induced biomechanical loading of the rat: an experimental and anatomically accurate computational blast injury model. J Neurotrauma. 2012;29:2352–64.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Chavko M, Koller A, Prusaczyk K, McCarron M. Measurement of blast wave by a miniature fiber optic pressure transducer in the rat brain. J Neurosci Methods. 2007;159(2):277–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Panzer MB, Myers BS, Capehart BP, Bass CR. Development of a finite element model for blast brain injury and the effects of CSF cavitation. Ann Biomed Eng. 2012;40(7):1530–44.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kamnaksh A, Budde MD, Kovesdi E, Long JB, Frank JA, Agoston DV. Diffusion tensor imaging reveals acute subcortical changes after mild blast-induced traumatic brain injury. Sci Rep. 2014;4:4809.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Kwok HT, Baxter D, DeFelice J, Hellyer P, Kirkman E, Watts S, Midwinter N, Gentleman S, Sharp DJ. The neuropathology of blast traumatic brain injury in a porcine polytrauma model. Brain Inj. 2014;28(5–6):517–878.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Sharp DJ, Beckmann CF, Greenwood R, Kinnunen KM, Bonnelle V, De Boissezon X, Patel MC, Leech R. Default mode network functional and structural connectivity after traumatic brain injury. Brain. 2011;134:2233–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Leech R, Sharp DL. The role of the posterior cingulate cortex in cognition and disease. Brain. 2014;137:12–32.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Sarntinoranont M, Lee SJ, Hong Y, King MA, Subhash G, Kwon J, Moore DF. High-strain-rate brain injury model using submerged acute rat brain tissue slices. J Neurotrauma. 2012;29(2):418–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ouyang H, Galle B, Li J, Nauman E, Shi R. Biomechanics of spinal cord injury: a multimodal investigation using ex vivo guinea Pig spinal cord white matter. J Neurotrauma. 2008;25(1):19–29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fung YC, Yen MR, Zeng YJ. Characterization and modelling of thoraco-abdominal response to blast waves, vol 3, Lung dynamics and mechanical properties determination. Final Report to WRAIR under Contract DAMD17-82-C-2062; 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Butler BJ, Bo C, Tucker AW, Jardine AP, Proud WG, Williams A, Brown KA. Mechanical and histological characterisation of trachea tissue subjected to blast-type Pressures. J Phys Conf Ser. 2014;500(18):182007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Curry RJ. The Blast Impact and Survivability Research Unit (BISRU), University of Cape Town, 4th international conference on impact loading of lightweight structures (ICILLS), 12–16 January 2014, Cape Town, South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Shao Y, Connors BA, Evan AP, Willis LR, Lifshitz DA, Lingeman JE. Morphological changes induced in the pig kidney by extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy: nephron injury. Anat Rec A Discov Mol Cell Evol Biol. 2003;275A:979–89.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Brewer SL, Atala AA, Ackerman DM, Steinbeck GS. Shock wave lithotripsy damage in human cadaver kidneys. J Endourol. 1988;2(4):333–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Köhrmann KU, Back W, Bensemann J, Florian J, Weber A, Kahmann F, Rassweiler J, Alken P. The isolateci perfused kidney of the pig: new model to evaluate shock wave-induced lesions. J Endourol. 1994;8(2):105–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Morley MG, Nguyen JK, Heier JS, Shingleton BJ, Pasternak JF, Bower KS. Blast eye injuries: a review for first responders. Disaster Med Public Health Prep. 2010;4(2):154–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Glickman RD, Stidger D, Lund BJ, Bach S, Kelley A, Gray W, Sponsel WE, Reilly MA. Identification of trauma-related biomarkers following blast injuries to the eye. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(13):4469.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sherwood D, Sponsel WE, Lund BJ, Gray W, Watson R, Groth SL, Thoe K, Glickman RD, Reilly MA. Anatomical manifestations of primary blast ocular trauma observed in a postmortem porcine model. Inves Ophthalmol Vis Sci. 2014;55(2):1124–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hari Arora MEng, PhD, DIC, ACGI .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Arora, H., Eftaxiopoulou, T. (2016). Physical Models: Organ Models for Primary Blast. In: Bull, A., Clasper, J., Mahoney, P. (eds) Blast Injury Science and Engineering. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21867-0_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21867-0_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-21866-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-21867-0

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics