Advertisement

Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Neurobehavioural Outcome in Traumatic Brain Injury

  • J. C. Godersky
  • L. R. Gentry
  • D. Tranel
  • G. N. Dyste
  • K. R. Danks
Conference paper
Part of the Acta Neurochirurgica book series (NEUROCHIRURGICA, volume 51)

Summary

Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging is a sensitive means of detecting haemorrhagic and nonhaemorrhagic forms of brain injury. This study correlates the neurobehavioural (NB) deficits in 49 adult patients with lesions detected by MR imaging. MR imaging was performed 2–19 days following trauma, analyzed for the injury type and graded for severity. A battery of NB tests was performed prior to hospital discharge or at the time of initial follow-up visit (31 patients). 15 patients were so severely impaired that testing could not be done and 3 died prior to discharge. The NB test scores were grouped into 3 levels of impairment.

The overall NB scores were compared with MR lesion severity ratings and a positive correlation found (r = 0.47). In addition, lesion severity, type and location resulted in specific NB deficits. We conclude that the lesion location and severity can be accurately identified by acute phase MR are associated with specific types of neurobehavioural deficits in a high percentage of testable patients.

Keywords

Traumatic Brain Injury Glasgow Coma Scale Diffuse Axonal Injury Subcortical Gray Matter Cortical Contusion 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Adams JH, Graham DI, Parker LS, Doyle D (1980) Brain damage in fatal non-missile head injury. J Clin Pathol 33: 1132–1145PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gentry LR, Godersky JC, Thompson B, Dunn VD (1988) Prospective comparative study of intermediate field MR and CT in the evaluation of closed head trauma. AJNR 9: 91–100Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gentry LR, Thompson B, Godersky JC (1988) Trauma to the corpus callosum: MR features. AJNR 9: 1129–1138Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Levin HS, Handel SF, Goldman AM, Eisenberg HM, Guinto FC (1985) Magnetic resonance imaging after “diffuse” nonmissile head injury. Arch Neurol 42: 963–968PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lobato RD, Cordobes F, Rivas JJ et al (1983) Outcome from severe head injury related to the type of intracranial lesion. J Neurosurg 59: 762–774PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Saul TG, Ducker TB (1982) Effect of intracranial pressure monitoring and aggressive treatment on mortality in severe head injury. J Neurosurg 56: 498–503PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Uzzell BP, Dolinskas CA, Wiser RF, Langfitt TW (1987) Influence of lesions detected by computed tomography on outcome and neuropsychological recovery after severe head injury. Neurosurg 20: 396–402CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wilson JTL, Wiedemann KD, Hadley DM, Condon B, Teasdale G, Brooks DN (1988) Early and late magnetic resonance imaging and neuropsychological outcome after head injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 51: 391–396PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. C. Godersky
    • 1
  • L. R. Gentry
    • 1
  • D. Tranel
    • 1
  • G. N. Dyste
    • 1
  • K. R. Danks
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Neurosurgery, Department of SurgeryUniversity of Iowa College of Medicine, C42 GH, University of Iowa HospitalsIowa CityUSA

Personalised recommendations