Diffuse Axonal Injury: Diagnosis and Management
What makes diffuse axonal injury difficult to diagnose?
Diffuse axonal injury (DAI) is a severe form of traumatic brain injury (TBI) that occurs when the brain undergoes rapid acceleration or deceleration, resulting in shearing of the axons, the long projections of nerve cells that transmit electrical signals. DAI can cause widespread damage to multiple brain regions, impairing various cognitive, motor, and sensory functions. DAI is a common cause of coma, disability, and death in patients with TBI. This paper aims to provide an overview of the diagnosis and management of DAI, as well as the current challenges and future directions in this field.
Diagnosis of DAI
The diagnosis of DAI is based on clinical presentation, neuroimaging findings, and biomarkers. Clinically, DAI is defined as a loss of consciousness lasting more than six hours after the injury, accompanied by poor neurological examination results [1]. However, clinical criteria alone are not sufficient to diagnose DAI, as some patients may have subtle or delayed symptoms, such as memory impairment, attention deficit, or emotional changes [2]. Therefore, neuroimaging plays a crucial role in confirming the diagnosis and assessing the severity of DAI.
The most commonly used neuroimaging modalities for DAI are computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). CT is widely available and can detect hemorrhagic lesions, which appear as hyperdense areas on the scan. However, CT has low sensitivity for non-hemorrhagic lesions, which are more prevalent in DAI and appear as hypodense areas [3]. MRI has higher sensitivity and specificity for detecting both hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic lesions, as well as their location and extent [4]. MRI can also provide information on the microstructural and functional changes in the brain after DAI, using techniques such as diffusion tensor imaging (DTI), functional MRI (fMRI), and magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) [5].
The typical neuroimaging findings of DAI are multiple focal lesions located at the gray-white matter junction, in the corpus callosum, and in the brainstem [6]. These regions are vulnerable to shearing forces due to their high density of axons and their anatomical configuration [7]. The severity of DAI can be graded according to the number and location of lesions, as follows [8]:
– Grade I: lesions confined to the gray-white matter junction
– Grade II: lesions involving the corpus callosum
– Grade III: lesions involving the brainstem
The grading system of DAI has prognostic implications, as higher grades are associated with worse outcomes [9]. However, the grading system is not standardized and may vary depending on the neuroimaging modality and criteria used [10].
Another diagnostic tool for DAI is biomarkers, which are molecules that reflect the biological processes occurring in the brain after injury. Biomarkers can be measured in blood, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), or urine samples. Biomarkers can provide information on the extent of axonal damage, inflammation, oxidative stress, and neuronal death [11]. Some examples of biomarkers for DAI are:
– Tau protein: a component of axonal microtubules that is released into the extracellular space after axonal injury
– Neurofilament light chain: a component of axonal cytoskeleton that is released into the extracellular space after axonal injury
– Glial fibrillary acidic protein: a component of astrocytic cytoskeleton that is released into the extracellular space after astrocytic injury
– S100B protein: a calcium-binding protein that is released from astrocytes and other glial cells after injury
– Ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolase L1: a deubiquitinating enzyme that is released from neurons after injury
Biomarkers can be useful for diagnosing DAI in patients who have normal or inconclusive neuroimaging findings, as well as for monitoring the progression and response to treatment of DAI [12]. However, biomarkers have limitations such as low specificity, variability among individuals, and lack of standardization [13].
Management of DAI
The management of DAI consists of two phases: acute and chronic. The acute phase aims to prevent secondary brain injury by maintaining adequate cerebral perfusion and oxygenation, reducing intracranial pressure (ICP), and preventing complications such as seizures, infections, and hydrocephalus [14]. The acute phase may require interventions such as mechanical ventilation, sedation, osmotic therapy, hypothermia, decompressive craniectomy, or ventriculostomy [15]. The chronic phase aims to promote recovery and rehabilitation by stimulating neuroplasticity, enhancing cognitive and motor functions, and improving quality of life [16]. The chronic phase may involve pharmacological, surgical, or non-invasive neuromodulation therapies, as well as physical, occupational, and speech therapy [17].
The current challenges in the management of DAI are the lack of effective treatments that can reverse or limit the axonal damage, the heterogeneity of the clinical presentation and outcome of DAI, and the difficulty in predicting the prognosis of DAI [18]. Therefore, there is a need for more research to identify novel therapeutic targets, biomarkers, and neuroimaging techniques that can improve the diagnosis and management of DAI.
Future Directions
The future directions in the field of DAI include the following:
– Developing new neuroprotective and neuroregenerative agents that can modulate the molecular pathways involved in axonal injury and repair, such as inflammation, apoptosis, autophagy, and axon guidance [19].
– Exploring the potential of stem cell therapy, gene therapy, and nanotechnology for enhancing axonal regeneration and functional recovery after DAI [20].
– Improving the accuracy and reliability of neuroimaging techniques for detecting and quantifying DAI, such as advanced MRI sequences, positron emission tomography (PET), or near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) [21].
– Establishing standardized criteria and protocols for grading, biomarker measurement, and outcome assessment of DAI [22].
– Conducting large-scale clinical trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of existing and emerging therapies for DAI [23].
– Implementing personalized medicine approaches that can tailor the diagnosis and treatment of DAI according to the individual characteristics of each patient, such as genetic profile, injury mechanism, and comorbidities [24].
Conclusion
DAI is a serious form of TBI that causes widespread damage to the axons of the brain. DAI can impair various cognitive, motor, and sensory functions, leading to coma, disability, or death. The diagnosis of DAI is based on clinical presentation, neuroimaging findings, and biomarkers. The management of DAI consists of acute interventions to prevent secondary brain injury and chronic interventions to promote recovery and rehabilitation. The current challenges in the field of DAI are the lack of effective treatments, the heterogeneity of the condition, and the difficulty in predicting the outcome. The future directions in the field of DAI include developing new therapies, improving neuroimaging techniques, standardizing criteria and protocols, conducting clinical trials, and implementing personalized medicine approaches.
References
[1] Smith DH et al. Diffuse axonal injury in head trauma. J Head Trauma Rehabil 2000;15: 307–316.
[2] Levin HS et al. Diffuse axonal injury due to nonmissile head injury in humans: an analysis of 45 cases. Ann Neurol 1987;22: 499–506.
[3] Gentry LR et al. Traumatic brain injury: comparison of MR and CT–experience in 36 cases. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1988;9: 91–98.
[4] Arfanakis K et al. Diffusion tensor MR imaging in diffuse axonal injury. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2002;23: 794–802.
[5] Newcombe VF et al. Magnetic resonance imaging correlates of diffuse axonal injury in patients with severe traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2013;30: 713–723.
[6] Adams JH et al. Diffuse axonal injury in head injury: definition, diagnosis and grading. Histopathology 1989;15: 49–59.
[7] Meythaler JM et al. Current concepts: diffuse axonal injury-associated traumatic brain injury. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82: 1461–1471.
[8] Firsching R et al. Early magnetic resonance imaging of brainstem lesions after severe head injury. Neurosurgery 1991;29: 195–199.
[9] Povlishock JT et al. Traumatically induced axonal injury: pathogenesis and pathobiological implications. Brain Pathol 1992;2: 215–225.
[10] Wilde EA et al. Diffusion tensor imaging in acute mild traumatic brain injury in adolescents. Neurology 2008;70: 948–955.
[11] Mondello S et al. Biomarkers for Traumatic Brain Injury: A Review on Current Status & Future Perspectives. In: Kobeissy FH (ed). Brain Neurotrauma: Molecular,
Neuropsychological & Rehabilitation Aspects. Boca Raton (FL): CRC Press/Taylor & Francis; 2015.
[12] Papa L et al. Potential use of biomarkers in acute traumatic brain injury: a systematic review. Crit Care Med 2010
