Cognitive impairment in diffuse axonal injury patients with favorable outcome.
Montreal cognitive assessment
cognitive domain
cognitive impairment
diffuse axonal injury
outcome
Journal
Frontiers in neuroscience
ISSN: 1662-4548
Titre abrégé: Front Neurosci
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101478481
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2023
2023
Historique:
received:
23
10
2022
accepted:
09
01
2023
entrez:
10
2
2023
pubmed:
11
2
2023
medline:
11
2
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Traumatic brain injury (TBI), especially the severe TBI are often followed by persistent cognitive sequalae, including decision-making difficulties, reduced neural processing speed and memory deficits. Diffuse axonal injury (DAI) is classified as one of the severe types of TBI. Part of DAI patients are marginalized from social life due to cognitive impairment, even if they are rated as favorable outcome. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the specific type and severity of cognitive impairment in DAI patients with favorable outcome. The neurocognition of 46 DAI patients with favorable outcome was evaluated by the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Basic (MoCA-BC), and the differences in the domains of cognitive impairment caused by different grades of DAI were analyzed after data conversion of scores of nine cognitive domains of MoCA-BC by Pearson correlation analysis. Among the 46 DAI patients with favorable outcome, eight had normal cognitive function (MoCA-BC ≥ 26), and 38 had cognitive impairment (MoCA-BC < 26). The MoCA-BC scores were positively correlated with pupillary light reflex ( DAI patients with favorable outcome may still be plagued by cognitive impairment, and different grades of DAI cause different domains of cognitive impairment.
Sections du résumé
Background and purpose
UNASSIGNED
Traumatic brain injury (TBI), especially the severe TBI are often followed by persistent cognitive sequalae, including decision-making difficulties, reduced neural processing speed and memory deficits. Diffuse axonal injury (DAI) is classified as one of the severe types of TBI. Part of DAI patients are marginalized from social life due to cognitive impairment, even if they are rated as favorable outcome. The purpose of this study was to elucidate the specific type and severity of cognitive impairment in DAI patients with favorable outcome.
Methods
UNASSIGNED
The neurocognition of 46 DAI patients with favorable outcome was evaluated by the Chinese version of the Montreal Cognitive Assessment Basic (MoCA-BC), and the differences in the domains of cognitive impairment caused by different grades of DAI were analyzed after data conversion of scores of nine cognitive domains of MoCA-BC by Pearson correlation analysis.
Results
UNASSIGNED
Among the 46 DAI patients with favorable outcome, eight had normal cognitive function (MoCA-BC ≥ 26), and 38 had cognitive impairment (MoCA-BC < 26). The MoCA-BC scores were positively correlated with pupillary light reflex (
Conclusion
UNASSIGNED
DAI patients with favorable outcome may still be plagued by cognitive impairment, and different grades of DAI cause different domains of cognitive impairment.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36761409
doi: 10.3389/fnins.2023.1077858
pmc: PMC9905128
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
1077858Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Chen, Yao, Li, Huang, Zhu, Chen, Su, Huang, Xu, Sun, Song, Jiang and Wang.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Références
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2016 Dec;64(12):e285-e290
pubmed: 27996103
Neurol Genet. 2020 Jun 16;6(4):e446
pubmed: 32637630
Brain. 2021 Apr 12;144(3):800-816
pubmed: 33739417
Front Neurosci. 2022 Jul 07;16:905979
pubmed: 35937885
J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2018 Jul;85(1):155-159
pubmed: 29462087
Lancet Neurol. 2020 Nov;19(11):886
pubmed: 33098789
J Neurotrauma. 2018 Oct 15;35(20):2357-2364
pubmed: 29774826
Histopathology. 1989 Jul;15(1):49-59
pubmed: 2767623
Brain Inj. 2021 Dec 06;35(14):1674-1681
pubmed: 35015614
BMC Neurol. 2019 Nov 4;19(1):269
pubmed: 31684893
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005 Apr;53(4):695-9
pubmed: 15817019
Neuropsychiatr Dis Treat. 2018 Aug 21;14:2133-2140
pubmed: 30174426
World Neurosurg. 2021 Aug;152:e118-e127
pubmed: 34033962
Front Neurol. 2022 Sep 01;13:887818
pubmed: 36119705
World Neurosurg. 2021 Jul;151:e1024-e1035
pubmed: 34033953
Neuroreport. 2021 May 5;32(7):588-595
pubmed: 33850090
Turk Neurosurg. 2022;32(1):6-15
pubmed: 33759150
Front Neurol. 2021 Sep 14;12:704576
pubmed: 34594294
Brain Inj. 2018;32(10):1208-1217
pubmed: 30024781
J Neurotrauma. 2021 Dec;38(23):3260-3278
pubmed: 34617451
J Alzheimers Dis. 2022;90(1):263-270
pubmed: 36093696
Behav Brain Res. 2020 Jan 27;378:112268
pubmed: 31580914
Brain Behav. 2022 Mar;12(3):e2490
pubmed: 35103410
J Neurotrauma. 1998 Aug;15(8):573-85
pubmed: 9726257
Arch Neurol. 2006 Mar;63(3):418-24
pubmed: 16533969
J Neurosurg. 2010 Sep;113(3):556-63
pubmed: 19852541
Int J Mol Sci. 2021 Oct 08;22(19):
pubmed: 34639206
World Neurosurg. 2020 Mar;135:e424-e426
pubmed: 31843722
Lancet Neurol. 2019 Mar;18(3):286-295
pubmed: 30784557
Nutr Neurosci. 2022 Jul;25(7):1534-1547
pubmed: 33487123
Hum Brain Mapp. 2022 Oct 15;43(15):4609-4619
pubmed: 35722945
J Comput Assist Tomogr. 2017 Nov/Dec;41(6):877-883
pubmed: 28708729
Front Neurosci. 2022 Jul 22;16:969971
pubmed: 35937870
Asian J Psychiatr. 2019 Mar;41:60-65
pubmed: 30396805
Psychol Med. 2018 Jul;48(9):1397-1399
pubmed: 29636117
J Clin Med. 2022 Aug 10;11(16):
pubmed: 36012917
J Neurosurg. 2019 Oct 11;:1-9
pubmed: 31604329
J Physiol. 2020 Jun;598(11):2045-2046
pubmed: 32196662