Temporary Blood Brain Barrier Damage and Continued Edema Formation in Experimental Closed Head Injury in the Rat

  • W. A. van den Brink
  • B. O. Santos
  • A. Marmarou
  • C. J. J. Avezaat
Conference paper


The disruption of the blood brain barrier (BBB) and development of brain edema concomitant with traumatic brain injury has been well established [5,7]. In experimental studies, at least two factors contribute to this disruption immediately upon impact; the mechanical deformation of tissue and cerebral vessels and the hypertensive surge that accompanies the injury. This hypertensive surge is seen with experimental fluid percussion injury [1]. In fact, hypertension alone is sufficient to cause BBB disruption and models of pharmacologic induced hypertension mimicking the surge observed with experimental models have produced similar defects in the barrier [8]. The objective of this study was to determine if a similar hypertensive surge and BBB disruption occurred with impact-acceleration to the closed calvarium as has been observed with direct dural impact. This would help clarify the role that hypertension plays in the degree of barrier disruption in mechanical trauma under conditions more allied to the clinical experience.


Blood Brain Barrier Edema Formation Blood Brain Barrier Disruption Brain Water Content Fluid Percussion Injury 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Dixon CE, Lighthall JW, Anderson TE (1988) Physiologic, histopathologic, and cineradiographic characterization of a new fluid percussion model of experimental brain injury in the rat. J Neurotrauma 5:99–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ellis EF, Chao J, Heizer ML (1989) Brain kininogen following experimental brain injury: evidence for a secondary event. J Neurosurg 71:437–442PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Haggendal E, Johansson B (1972) On the pathophysiology of the increased cerebrovascular permeability in acute arterial hypertension in cats. Acta Neurol Scand 48:265–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kuroiwa T, Shibutani M, Tajima T, Hirasawa H, Okeda R (1990) Hydrostatic pressure versus osmotic pressure in the development of vasogenic brain edema induced by cold injury. In: Long D (ed) Advances in Neurology, Raven Press, New York, pp 11–19Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marmarou A, Shima K (1990) Comparative studies of edema produced by fluid percussion injury with lateral and central modes of injury in cats. In: Long D (ed) Advances in Neurology, Raven Press, Ltd., New York, pp 233–236Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Marmarou A, Tanaka K, Shulman K (1982) An improved gravimetric measure of cerebral edema. J Neurosurg 56:246–253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mcintosh TK, Soares H, Thomas M, Cloherty K (1990) Development of regional cerebral oedema after lateral fluid-percussion brain injury in the rat. Acta Neurochir, Suppl 51:263–264Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhang XM, Ellis EF (1990) Superoxide dismutase reduces permeability and edema induced by hypertension in rats. Am J Physiol (In Press)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    van den Brink WA, Marmarou A, Avezaat CJJ (1990) Brain oedema in experimental closed head injury in the rat. Acta Neurochir, Suppl 51:261–262Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • W. A. van den Brink
    • 1
  • B. O. Santos
    • 1
  • A. Marmarou
    • 1
  • C. J. J. Avezaat
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of NeurosurgeryMedical College of VirginiaRichmondUSA
  2. 2.Department of NeurosurgeryErasmus University RotterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations