Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
Research ArticleContinung Education

Brain Trauma Imaging

Gérard N. Bischof and Donna J. Cross
Journal of Nuclear Medicine January 2023, 64 (1) 20-29; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2967/jnumed.121.263293
Gérard N. Bischof
1Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany;
2Institute for Neuroscience and Medicine II–Molecular Organization of the Brain, Research Center Juelich, Juelich, Germany; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Donna J. Cross
3Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Imaging of mild traumatic brain injury (TBI) using conventional techniques such as CT or MRI often results in no specific imaging correlation that would explain cognitive and clinical symptoms. Molecular imaging of mild TBI suggests that secondary events after injury can be detected using PET. However, no single specific pattern emerges that can aid in diagnosing the injury or determining the prognosis of the long-term behavioral profiles, indicating the heterogeneous and diffuse nature of TBI. Chronic traumatic encephalopathy, a primary tauopathy, has been shown to be strongly associated with repetitive TBI. In vivo data on the available tau PET tracers, however, have produced mixed results and overall low retention profiles in athletes with a history of repetitive mild TBI. Here, we emphasize that the lack of a mechanistic understanding of chronic TBI has posed a challenge when interpreting the results of molecular imaging biomarkers. We advocate for better target identification, improved analysis techniques such as machine learning or artificial intelligence, and novel tracer development.

  • traumatic brain injury
  • molecular imaging
  • chronic traumatic encephalopathy

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a significant public health problem worldwide. It is the leading cause of death and disability in children and young adults in the United States, with variable long-term outcomes in survivors (1–3). There is increasing evidence that for some individuals, TBI might be not only an acute and self-limiting event but also a trigger, which can initiate a chronic, sometimes lifelong degenerative process (4).

Acute brain injuries are traditionally classified clinically by the Glasgow coma scale (GCS) as mild, moderate, or severe (5). A detailed summary of TBI levels with the corresponding clinical definitions and reported symptoms is listed in Table 1.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1.

Terminology for Head Trauma in TBI

Incidence rates vary because there is no consensus on a common or standardized classification system. Evidence from European epidemiologic studies calculate a TBI severity ratio of 22:1.5:1 for mild, moderate, and severe injuries, respectively (6), whereas in the United States, recent reports suggest that 82.5% of TBIs are mild, 8.3% moderate, and 1.0% severe (7).

The GCS score is a useful method to assess the level of consciousness among trauma victims but can be inaccurate because of levels of sedation and the need for intubation. More importantly, most TBIs are mild, including so-called concussions, and the GCS score is not useful to assess such cases. In addition, GCS scores do not provide pathophysiologic or mechanical information on the injury.

Imaging can provide valuable in vivo information on the extent and severity of an acute brain injury. In particular, CT of the head or MRI is used in the clinical work-up of injuries for GCS scores of below 13. Unenhanced CT is the imaging modality of choice for the evaluation of acute moderate to severe TBI. It has many benefits, which include low cost, wide availability, and high accuracy for triaging TBI patients in need of surgical intervention. However, for mild TBI (mTBI), CT may fail to detect more subtle anatomic findings of acute injury.

For mild injuries with GCS scores of 13–15, specific criteria to warrant the use of CT or MRI should be present. These include a GCS of less than 15 at 2 h after trauma, a suspected open or depressed skull fracture, any sign of skull base fracture, an age of 65 y or older, amnesia for more than 30 min, 2 or more episodes of vomiting, and a dangerous mechanism of injury (8). However, there is no consensus on the clinical indications to perform MRI for acute trauma. MRI may be considered when there are discrepancies between CT and clinical findings, such as negative CT results and poor neurologic status, or when there are persistent symptoms.

A typical brain MRI protocol in TBI might include standard T1-weighted imaging, T2-weighted fast spin-echo imaging, axial gradient-echo imaging, and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging. MRI is more sensitive in detecting subtle indications of diffuse axonal injury than is CT (Fig. 1). However, one study indicated that the use of MRI for acute mTBI did not result in changes in patient management (9), and better guidelines are needed.

FIGURE 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 1.

MRI vs. CT for imaging acute mTBI: Example from mTBI patient in which CT was read as normal. However, subsequent MRI showed multiple small, elliptic lesions in white matter on gradient-echo image and callosal hyperintensity on fluid-attenuated inversion recovery image, indicating diffuse axonal injury. FLAIR = fluid-attenuated inversion recovery; GRE = gradient echo.

Over the past decade, the potential long-term consequences of repeated mTBIs have been recognized. Multiple pathologic processes link single TBIs with dementia (3,10), and repeated concussions and subconcussive injuries may trigger pathogenic processes that later manifest as neurodegenerative disorders (11). In particular, chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE) is the most common neurodegenerative disorder linked to repeated mTBIs. CTE can present symptoms and pathologic findings comparable with other neurologic diseases, including Alzheimer disease (AD), Parkinson disease, frontotemporal dementia, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (12). Pathologically, CTE is characterized on postmortem examination by widespread brain atrophy and microscopic accumulation of neurofibrillary tangles in the superficial neocortical layers and depths of the sulci. In addition, diffuse gliosis may be apparent (13). Efforts to establish antemortem clinical diagnostic criteria for traumatic encephalopathy syndrome (TES), the clinical disorder associated with pathologically defined CTE, are ongoing. In the first National Institute of Neurologic Disorders and Stroke consensus workshop for TES in 2019, panelists agreed that biomarker evidence, including imaging, was not sufficiently advanced to be included as diagnostic criteria at that time (14).

At present, molecular imaging using PET combined with specific radiotracers such as 18F-FDG for glucose metabolism and proteomic specific imaging for amyloid and tau deposition have been applied, mainly for research of TBI and CTE. This review will present the current status and challenges of these various imaging modalities for TBI and suggest future directions that may significantly aid diagnosis and treatment.

ACUTE AND SECONDARY FEATURES OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY

Microscopically, acute moderate to severe TBIs involve mechanical disruption of ion channels and cellular processes such as axonal transport, which if not reestablished can result in axonal swelling and, ultimately, Wallerian degeneration (13). On a global scale, these injuries result mainly in hematomas, contusions, and what is termed diffuse axonal or diffuse traumatic injury. Downstream macroscopic features of severe to moderate TBI might include cerebral edema, ischemia, and herniation, as well as blood–brain barrier impairment and neuroinflammation (15).

Mild TBIs may also involve acute dysregulation of ion channels and axonal injury, including loss of cytoskeletal integrity. White matter shearing by mechanical impact occurs primarily in transition regions between different tissue densities or structural rigidities, such as white matter/gray matter boundaries (13). In addition, neurons with longer axons, such as corticocortical projection neurons, are more susceptible. Even mild impacts can interrupt axonal transport and other homeostatic processes such as blood–brain barrier permeability and can result in a prolonged inflammatory response (16). Postconcussive symptoms can range from none to one or more, including headache, dizziness, loss of concentration, blurry vision, anxiety, fatigue, and insomnia, which may persist over time (15).

In addition to blunt force trauma, TBIs from exposure to explosive blasts can occur. Blast-related hazards are not restricted to collisions with objects or a violent impact with something such as the wall of a vehicle. By itself, primary blast overpressure can damage the brain. In war, soldiers and civilians can be exposed to repeated subconcussive blast overpressure events (17). Many features of impact TBI overlap with blast-related TBI; however, there are additional aspects such as a vascular surge, which add to the pathophysiology of the injury (18). How these differences may alter the eventual risk for later-life neurodegenerative disorders, including CTE, is not known but remains an active area of research for military institutions.

In both acute and chronic phases, it can be challenging to detect subtle, diffuse white matter injuries and microhemorrhages in individual patients by clinical imaging modalities. Research is ongoing to develop new methods, including imaging, to serve as biomarkers of mild injuries. The subsequent sections of this article present such investigations with a goal of characterizing the pathophysiology of chronic mTBIs and of identifying biomarkers that may represent incipient neurodegenerative processes.

IMAGING IN TBI RESEARCH

MRI of Brain Injury

MRI may be used clinically for acute mTBI to detect diffuse axonal injury and other subtle indications of tissue injury. However, in research, various MRI modalities have been used to investigate alterations in a chronic TBI, which may be associated with poor long-term outcomes, including neurodegenerative diseases (Fig. 1). Since the primary focus of this review is molecular imaging, we will briefly summarize such MRI modalities, which have been described in more detail elsewhere (19).

Trifan et al. retrospectively investigated MRI correlates of persistent symptoms in young adults (<45 y old, n = 180) with a variety of single injury mechanisms and severity, but most were diagnosed as mild (20). MRI included T1-weighted, fluid-attenuated inversion recovery, and susceptibility-weighted imaging, which is sensitive to iron deposition. Fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging was most sensitive in detecting mild abnormalities such as white matter hyperintensities, and susceptibility-weighted imaging became more sensitive as the injury severity and likelihood of microhemorrhages increased. However, the authors concluded that although abnormalities on MRI can explain persistent symptoms in TBI, in many of the mild cases (38%) no such abnormalities could be detected.

Diffusion tensor imaging is a quantitative measure of structural integrity, which assesses the direction of water diffusion within white matter tracts. The approximate ratio of axial to radial diffusivity within a tract is calculated as the fractional anisotropy, in which values approaching 1 represent more intact white matter. This is because myelin and other axonal components restrict water diffusion primarily in the radial direction, whereas diffusion in the axial direction is relatively unrestricted. Diffusion tensor imaging has been widely applied to TBI research (21). In chronic mTBI, reductions in fractional anisotropy have been reported (22) that may indicate the presence of neurodegeneration in the brain. However, the findings are somewhat contradictory because the fractional anisotropy value may be affected by transient alterations in cellularity, such as gliosis, which can also restrict diffusion in the radial direction, thereby altering the overall ratio (23). In addition, fractional anisotropy values in white matter can change in chronic TBI and are fairly nonspecific to a particular pathologic process. Because of these limitations, diffusion tensor imaging may not be suitable as a clinical biomarker of mTBI or a diagnostic indication of incipient neurodegenerative disease.

Other MR modalities are more sensitive to specific pathologic processes and have been used to investigate chronic TBI. MR spectroscopy can measure small alterations in cortical metabolites such as choline for axonal injury and inflammation, N-acetyl-aspartate for neuronal viability, lactate for hypoxia, glutamate and glutamine for excitatory neurotransmission, creatine for cerebral energetics, and myoinositol for glia activation and inflammation (24). Numerous studies have indicated alterations in these metabolites in acute and chronic TBI and have been summarized elsewhere (24). However, MRS acquisition and analyses can be challenging to perform and interpret (25). More research is needed to determine its potential value as a biomarker of injury and neurodegeneration in TBI.

Resting-state functional MRI is a measure of the functional connectivity in the brain and has been used to evaluate consciousness in acutely brain-injured patients (26). However, a systematic review of more than 45 peer-reviewed articles found no consistent changes or convergent findings to reflect a relationship between postconcussive symptoms and resting-state functional MRI. The authors suggest this may be due to heterogeneity in both injury patterns and long-term behavioral profiles in patients.

Other advanced MRI modalities such as MR elastography, which assesses stiffness and elastic properties of tissue, and magnetization transfer imaging, which correlates with myelin integrity, have been used to investigate particular features of TBI that may be relevant to long-term outcomes. Changes in MR elastography are thought to reflect neuroinflammation, demyelination, and neurodegeneration as markers of a chronic degenerative state in the brain. Limited studies, primarily in preclinical models, have indicated promising results to sensitively detect injured brain tissue (27). Although this lack of specificity for a particular mechanism related to post-trauma degeneration does not provide information on the injured brain, there may be diagnostic utility as a sensitive biomarker of incipient irreversible brain damage to guide patient management decisions. More research is needed to determine whether MR elastography can detect the onset of a chronic degenerative condition. Magnetization transfer imaging techniques such as macromolecular proton fraction imaging have been shown to be associated with myelin integrity (28). Macromolecular proton fraction was used to investigate chronic changes associated with repeated mTBI from blasts in veterans (22). Voxelwise analyses demonstrated that macromolecular proton fraction values were 6.8%–24.7% lower in blast mTBI than in non–blast-exposed veterans in multiple white matter tracts, indicating a sensitive measure of chronic white matter injury. However, more research is needed to determine the clinical utility of these more esoteric modalities.

PET Imaging

18F-FDG

Chronic mTBI can be difficult to characterize using conventional MRI or CT. Imaging of glucose metabolism using 18F-FDG PET may be better suited to examining functional alterations related not only to the metabolic activity of any given brain region but also to additional neurovascular changes, which may be linked to symptomatology.

Previous studies of metabolic patterns in patients with mTBIs have found much heterogeneity, including no change in glucose metabolism (29), and hypometabolism in the parietal regions (22) or the amygdala. Many of these studies, however, were characterized by a low sample size and a mixed patient population with or without clinical or cognitive symptoms, which may in part contribute to the heterogeneity in the observed findings. A recent study with a larger sample size (n = 89, with a single blunt mTBI from a vehicle accident and without visible lesions on MRI/CT, vs. 93 age-matched controls) found both hypermetabolism (parahippocampal gyrus, middle temporal gyrus, cingulate, precuneus, and brain stem) and concurrent hypometabolism (angular gyrus, calcarine cortex, and middle/superior frontal brain regions) (30). In addition, the study found that the hypometabolism in frontal brain regions was associated with decreased cognitive scores. Such a finding provides evidence for the sensitivity of 18F-FDG PET to relate changes in glucose metabolism with reduced cognitive function. Further evaluation is needed to determine whether 18F-FDG PET can be used as a diagnostic marker of specific long-term effects in mTBI, as the underlying cause for alterations in the 18F-FDG PET signal can be difficult to determine. Formal testing of the sensitivity of 18FDG PET to track longitudinal changes in glucose patterns indicative of long-term cognitive and clinical impairments are needed to establish a role for glucose metabolism in diagnosing and treating chronic mTBI symptoms. For example, 18F-FDG PET in AD aids the diagnosis and is suitable to evaluate disease progression (31). In contrast, there is no clear pattern of 18F-FDG specific to TBI compared with other neurodegenerative diseases such as AD or dementia with Lewy bodies (Figs. 2A and 2B) (32). In addition to heterogeneity in the hypometabolic patterns, research on individuals with multiple blast exposures indicated that metabolic patterns may change over time in the same individuals. This finding suggests a degree of functional reorganization in the chronic rTBI patients and hampers efforts to use 18F-FDG PET to assess whether the brain injury is improving or declining longitudinally (Fig. 3).

FIGURE 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 2.

In patients with AD and dementia with Lewy bodies, typical hypometabolic patterns vs. randomly selected cases of repeated mTBI from exposure to blasts. (A) Representative 3-dimensional stereotactic surface projection (3D-SSP) z score map from patient clinically diagnosed with AD shows typical AD pattern of hypometabolism in posterior cingulate cortex and in parietal, temporal, and frontal lobes, with relative sparing of sensorimotor cortex. Diffuse Lewy body dementia is generally characterized by hypometabolism in occipital regions on 18F-FDG PET imaging. (B) Selected examples of 3D-SSP maps from veterans with multiple blast TBI exposures indicate pattern heterogeneity across subjects. Rows are single-subject 3D-SSP z score maps of hypometabolic voxels compared with reference database of age-matched community controls (n = 9). ANT = anterior; DLB = dementia with Lewy bodies; INF = inferior; LT. LAT = left lateral; LT. MED = left medial; POST = posterior; RT. LAT = right lateral; RT. MED = right medial; SUP = superior.

FIGURE 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 3.

Longitudinal 18F-FDG PET in individuals with repeated mTBI from blast. Subjectively, one can appreciate that 18F-FDG PET from case 1 appears to be recovering; that is, there are fewer apparent hypometabolic pixels in scan 2 than in scan 1 (arrows indicate some regional differences). This subject had 44% decrease in number of hypometabolic voxels globally from scan 1 to scan 2. However case 2 indicates the opposite, with 46% increase in number of hypometabolic voxels globally. Not all cases are this clear-cut; some showed clear evidence of reorganization, with some regions increasing and others decreasing in total number of hypometabolic pixels (Fig. 4). Initial scans were 3–5 y after last blast, with 1–2 y interval between scans. ANT = anterior; INF = inferior; LT. LAT = left lateral; LT. MED = left medial; POST = posterior; RT. LAT = right lateral; RT. MED = right medial; SUP = superior.

These limitations and overall lack of specificity for 18F-FDG PET to discriminate the long-term sequelae of mTBI may diminish its utility as a diagnostic biomarker of trauma-associated brain injury and progression to a neurodegenerative condition in individual patients. Therefore, PET imaging using radionuclides with protein-specific binding are also under investigation.

Tau PET

Pathologically, after a single TBI only one third of subjects showed abundant neurofibrillary tangles at autopsy years after injury (33). Although the mechanistic pathway by which a single impact triggers tangle formation is not well understood, it is thought that axonal injury leads to tau hyperphosphorylation and subsequent aggregation (34). In recent years, extensive development of tau-selective radiotracers of the first generation (i.e., 18F-T807 [18F-AV-1451], 18F-T808, 18F-THK-5351, 18F-THK-5105, and 18F-THK-5117) and second generation (i.e., 18F-RO-948, 18F-MK-6240, 18F-PI-2620, 18F-JNJ-311, and 18F-GTP1) has offered a unique opportunity to image tau pathology in patients with TBI (35). The most widely used tau PET tracer, 18F-AV-1451 (18F-flortaucipir), was recently evaluated in a cohort of 21 patients with a history of a single moderate to severe TBI and a median follow-up of 32 y after injury (36). The spatial extent of the 18F-flortaucipir signal in gray and white matter was greater in the TBI group than in age-matched controls and was most pronounced in the right lateral occipital area, whereas the medial temporal lobes did not show significant differences (36). A multimodal imaging study using both an inflammatory PET radioligand (i.e., 11C-PK11195) and 18F-THK5317 as a tau selective tracer in 6 moderate-to severe TBI patients observed tau deposition in the thalami, temporal white matter, and midbrain regions in conjunction with evidence of widespread neuroinflammation (37). A larger cohort of 27 moderate to severe TBI patients was imaged using 11C-PBB3 as the tau-targeting tracer, and uptake was most pronounced in the temporal and occipital gray and white matter, in addition to frontal white matter (38). Importantly, the authors separately analyzed patients with repeated TBIs (i.e., potential TES) versus those with a single TBI and found that the white matter signal retention was enhanced in the repeated-TBI patients. Interestingly, the binding of 11C-PBB3 correlated with psychosis severity in the TBI cohort. The authors suggest that TBI presents a unique pattern of tau pathology distinguishable from the spatial distribution of other tauopathies such as AD or progressive supranuclear palsy. The development of tau pathology in chronic TBI and how it relates to the severity of persistent clinical symptoms remains a critically important area of research.

Among the current tau tracers used for TBI research, some heterogeneity in the binding patterns has emerged. In some cases, subcortical but not cortical gray matter was involved, whereas in others, white matter but not gray matter was most significantly associated with clinical symptoms. The origin of such disparate findings could be tracer- or cohort-dependent. For example, the amplitude of the signal retention for tau PET tracers for a single moderate to severe TBI is relatively low compared with AD. It is possible that the accumulation of tau pathology increases in a chronic phase and is therefore not as evident in the acute phase of a single TBI. Alternatively, the affinity of the tau tracers may be less sensitive to isoforms of tau pathology from TBI (39), resulting in lower tracer retention. Therefore, the target sensitivity of the currently available tau PET tracers for TBI needs further investigation.

Amyloid Imaging

Several radiotracers are used to visualize β-amyloid in the brain, including the Food and Drug Administration/European Medicines Agency–approved 18F-florbetapir, 18F-florbetaben, 18F-flutemetamol, 18F-florbetapir, and others such as 18F-NAV4694 and the first β-amyloid tracer, 11C-Pittsburgh compound B. Case reports using 18F-florbetapir at 1, 12, and 24 mo after TBI found an increase in β-amyloid deposition initially, which was cleared by 1 and 12 mo in the left hippocampus and caudate nucleus, whereas regions such as the right hippocampus and left anterior putamen showed a steady increase to the 24-mo time point (40). In one study, 15 patients with moderate to severe TBI were scanned between 1 and 365 d after injury using 11C-Pittsburgh compound B and showed increased binding in cortical gray matter and the striatum (41). The elevated binding in gray matter regions (i.e., frontal, parietal, occipital, and lateral temporal) was ubiquitous except in the hippocampus, where no significant differences from controls were observed. Interestingly, the effect of a history of mTBI on β-amyloid burden in clinically normal older adults was investigated (42) in a cross-sectional and longitudinal study design. The authors observed trend-level increases in β-amyloid aggregation over time in individuals with (n = 11) or without (n = 19) a history of TBI, and no differences in β-amyloid burden between groups or interactions with cognitive performance were observed (42). Research comparing older adults with (n = 81) and without (n = 240) prior TBI showed significantly increased orbitofrontal, prefrontal, superior frontal, and posterior cingulate SUV ratios using 18F-florbetapir (43). Although β-amyloid deposition can be initially elevated after brain injury, in chronic phases the β-amyloid deposition may be cleared. Different factors may impact clearance mechanisms in patients after a single TBI, which may alter the aggregation of β-amyloid in a chronic phase. For example, it was shown that amyloid-precursor protein secretase has a detrimental role in the initiation of secondary injury after TBI in mice (44). Decreasing secretase activity was shown to block secondary injury, suggesting that the level of amyloid-precursor protein secretase after injury influences differential outcomes after mTBI. Other known risk factors and comorbidities for β-amyloid deposition such as age, genetic risk, or vascular factors may contribute to observed differences and need to be carefully controlled for in future studies.

Imaging of Neuroinflammation in Brain Trauma

Inflammation in the central nervous system is associated with many psychiatric and neurodegenerative diseases. In TBI, the mechanical impact initiates a host of secondary events, including free radical generation and an inflammatory response via infiltrating microglia, activated astrocytes, and the endothelial cells of the blood–brain barrier. PET imaging using radiotracers such as 11C-PK11195, which binds to the translocator protein, have been used to evaluate the inflammatory response after mTBI. Translocator protein is a protein expressed in high levels in activated microglia, as well as in peripheral monocytes and astrocytes. At various times after TBI (i.e., 11 mo to 17 y), in a small number of patients (n = 10) with moderate to severe injury, significantly higher 11C-PK11195 binding was observed in the thalamus, putamen, occipital cortices, and posterior region of the internal capsule (45). Even shorter follow-up scans at only 6 mo after injury found enhanced 11C-PK11195 signal in 8 patients with moderate to severe mTBI. Another translocator protein marker, 11C-DPA-713, was imaged in active and retired football players (7–42 y after the last self-reported concussion), and increased signal retention was found in many brain regions (46). These results suggest that activated microglia remain present in patients with a remote history of TBI. One major limitation with 11C-DPA-713 is different binding potentials based on the rs6971 genotypes, in which a polymorphism results in reduced binding affinity. PET analysis of DPA-713 needs to be corrected for this polymorphism for accurate interpretation of findings.

An experimental study on patients after moderate to severe TBI targeted chronic microglia activation after 12 wks of treatment with minocycline, an tetracycline antibiotic that inhibits microglia activation (47). Plasma neurofilament light levels, white matter injury by MRI, and 11C-PBR28 PET were assessed before and after treatment. The authors reported a significant 25% reduction in 11C-PBR28 PET signal in both white matter and gray matter, as well as the thalamus, in the treated versus nontreated subjects. Interestingly, plasma neurofilament light levels increased after treatment but returned to baseline at 6 mo after drug discontinuation. The authors interpreted their results as evidence for therapeutic benefit of inhibition of microglia activation after mTBI (47).

These studies indicate that persistent neuroinflammation is a characteristic feature of chronic TBI. Importantly, translocator protein radiotracers detect not only activated microglia but also astrocytic activation and peripheral monocytes, suggesting that multiple mechanisms contribute to signal retention. Although current evidence suggests targeting inflammation as a potential therapeutic strategy, additional well-powered studies are needed. Moreover, the long-term consequences of chronic inflammation on neurodegenerative processes are not well understood.

Other Molecular Imaging Tracers for TBI Research

Because γ-aminobutyric acid is the principal inhibitory neurotransmitter in the brain, efforts to develop a sensitive tracer to measure γ-aminobutyric acid concentration has applications to many neurologic (e.g., epilepsy) and psychiatric (e.g., posttraumatic stress disorder) clinical syndromes. The tracer, 11C-flumazenil, is sensitive to γ-aminobutyric acid A-type benzodiazepine receptor binding and has been investigated in small cohorts of mTBI. In 1 study, 8 patients with diffuse axonal injury showed regionally low 11C-flumazenil uptake bilaterally in the medial frontal gyri, anterior cingulate gyri, and thalamus compared with controls (48). In another study, decreased uptake of 11C-flumazenil was observed in 60% of a cohort compromising 10 TBI patients and partially coincided with hypometabolism assessed by the cerebral metabolic rate of oxygen (49). Additionally, some regions did not show reduced binding of 11C-flumazenil, despite significant hypometabolism. The authors suggested that 11C-flumazenil binding may indicate regions where loss of neuronal integrity may be the underlying molecular correlate of the hypometabolic regions in mTBI (49). These studies indicate that abnormalities in γ-aminobutyric acid may play a role in chronic TBI, but neurotransmission is dependent on several factors affecting excitatory and inhibitory processes (50). Therefore, multimodal imaging, including imaging of neurotransmitter integrity, may unravel the contribution of neurotransmitter alterations in chronic TBI.

Synaptic vesicles store neurotransmitters within neurons and mediate release into the synaptic cleft via voltage-dependent calcium channels. The synaptic vesicle protein 2A is an integral 12-transmembrane domain glycoprotein present in neurons and is widely expressed in the brain. Currently used radiotracers for synaptic density are 11C-UCB-J and the fluorine-labeled analog 18F-SynVesT-1, and the pharmacokinetic characteristics have been described elsewhere (51). To date, no research on synaptic density in mTBI patients has been published; however, this tracer may prove valuable to link alterations in synaptic density with long-term clinical and cognitive consequences in mTBI.

Molecular Imaging of CTE and TES

CTE is a neurodegenerative condition most commonly associated with a history of repetitive TBI (rTBI), which often occurs in athletes or military personnel. CTE is a neuropathologic diagnosis characterized by phosphorylated tau protein aggregates in the depths of the cortical sulci, in neurons, and around blood vessels (52). It has been debated whether additional features such as brain stem pathology, β-amyloid deposition, α-synuclein Lewy bodies, TDP-43 pathology, vascular degeneration, or gliosis should be considered core features of CTE (53) or whether they are not distinctive enough to uniquely identify CTE at autopsy (53). To classify the clinical syndrome associated with rTBI, new criteria were proposed for the associated cognitive, clinical, neurologic, and psychiatric symptoms representing TES (54). The potential detrimental effects of rTBIs have been actively discussed in the research community as more evidence accumulates to link rTBIs to CTE and other neurodegenerative diseases, including AD (55), Parkinson disease (56), and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (57). Therefore, it is important to stress that histopathologically defined CTE is causally related to rTBI but that not all rTBI leads to a histopathologic diagnosis of CTE (58).

Because phosphorylated tau is a key pathophysiologic feature of CTE, the advent of tau PET tracers was initially thought to present an opportunity to image the spatial distribution of tau in living rTBI patients. A study comparing 18F-flortaucipir signal in retired amyloid-negative professional football athletes (n = 26) with controls (n = 31) found elevated binding in the medial temporal, parietal, and superior frontal brain regions, which correlated with years of active play but not with cognitive performance (59). A study using the TES research criteria to classify individuals who had a history of contact sports (n = 11; mostly American football players) and were exhibiting objective and subjective cognitive impairments compared 18F-flortaucipir uptake with amyloid-negative controls and AD patients and validated the proposed TES criteria (60). The authors observed only minute differences in increased uptake of 18F-flortaucipir in the medial frontal regions compared with controls but no significant differences in uptake compared with the AD cohort (60). Somewhat dampening the enthusiasm for 18F-flortaucipir to image tau pathology in CTE were autoradiographic studies showing only limited binding affinity for autopsy-confirmed cases of CTE with abundant tau inclusions (61,62). Potential differences in the binding affinity of 18F-flortaucipir could be due to fibril-folding differences recently revealed to be distinct between AD and CTE brains (39). Other tracers selective to tau pathology, such as 11C-PBB3, have indicated increased white-matter signal congruent with CTE criteria (38). However in a case report (63), 18F-MK6240 binding bilaterally in the superior frontal and medial temporal lobe regions did not correspond to autoradiography, suggesting low binding affinity of this tracer to CTE pathology (64). Together, these studies using currently available PET tracers for the in vivo depiction of phosphorylated tau have provided limited and inconsistent results. To move tau PET into the clinical realm for TES, more sensitive ligands need to be developed—ligands that incorporate specific binding characteristics for the fibril-folding structures of CTE tau pathology.

Other molecular targets have been investigated in cohorts of rTBI and probable CTE. In small cohorts of boxers (n = 5 (65) and n = 19 (66)), hypometabolism using 18F-FDG PET in the frontal, parietooccipital, cerebellar, and cingulate regions was observed, whereas in former football players, hypometabolism in the frontotemporal regions was most pronounced (60). The presence of β-amyloid burden has been suggested as an exclusion criterion for underlying CTE pathology with cognitive deficits (52), and most research evidence is confirmatory and indicates a lack of association with β-amyloid burden and previous history of rTBI (67,68).

Despite evidence of a relationship between postmortem CTE pathology and rTBI, current research studies using tau PET tracers in rTBI cohorts have not identified a universal pattern of tau deposition that is characteristic of rTBI. Newly outlined research criteria for TES will hopefully assist in identifying individuals at high risk for the pathophysiologic cascade of CTE. The advancement of novel tau and other protein- or mechanism-specific PET tracers may help unravel any distinct patterns of protein deposition. In addition, other tracers, such as 18F-FDG or neuroinflammation ligands, may help characterize brain alterations indicative of incipient neurodegenerative processes after rTBI.

IMAGE ANALYSIS AND CHALLENGES

A key challenge in imaging of acute and chronic TBI, rTBI, and TES/probable CTE is that research across all modalities explored to date has not revealed a cohesive pattern of structural or functional deficits—or of protein- or mechanism-specific uptake—that is common to most patients within a particular study cohort (Fig. 2). This lack of a cohesive pattern is due primarily to the unique profile of the underlying substrate for the condition—that is, brain “injuries”—as well as individual differences in the longitudinal response and recovery after injury. Figure 3 shows examples of 2 veterans who experienced multiple mild blast exposures, with the initial 18F-FDG PET acquired 3–5 y after the last exposure and follow-up scans acquired approximately 2 y later. Characteristic patterns of both recovery of glucose metabolism and reduction of glucose metabolism are visible. Such regional reorganization in combination with regions of prolonged hypometabolism (Fig. 4) need to be further evaluated in the context of clinical decline for rTBI patients.

FIGURE 4.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIGURE 4.

Three-dimensional stereotactic surface projection maps showing example of reorganization in single mTBI subject from scan 1 to scan 2. Casual visual inspection may conclude that subject’s scans have improved because severely hypometabolic region of inferior medial frontal lobe on scan 1 has improved subjectively by scan 2. This was supported in thresholding analysis (second and bottom rows), which indicated 40% decrease in number of voxels with z score ≥ 1.64 (hypometabolic voxels) for that region. However, analysis of 26 regions covering entire brain indicated that other regions, such as right lateral frontal region, actually became more hypometabolic (50% increase in hypometabolic voxels)—likely a result of reorganization and compensation over time. This subject also showed an 8% increase in hypometabolic voxels globally from scan 1 to scan 2. ANT = anterior; INF = inferior; LT. LAT = left lateral; LT. MED = left medial; POST = posterior; RT. LAT = right lateral; RT. MED = right medial; SUP = superior.

Regardless of modality, most imaging research and clinical studies to date have used groupwise analytic techniques to investigate the common features of acute and chronic TBI, rTBI, and probable TES/CTE. However, these studies, taken collectively, have failed to converge on such common features, which could have diagnostic or discriminatory utility in a clinical setting for individual patients. There is a distinct and critical need for new quantitative biomarkers of either protein or mechanism-specific tracers combined with novel image analysis methods, which may not depend on a specific regional pattern to sensitively detect and classify TBI and related neurodegenerative processes.

Supervised learning techniques such as scaled subprofile model principal-component analysis may improve the information inferred from PET imaging by capitalizing both on abnormal patterns of tracer retention and on the covariance across regional uptake (69). Such methods have identified distinct and reliable patterns in tau PET imaging between primary and secondary tauopathies (70) and metabolic brain patterns selective for Parkinson disease, progressive supranuclear palsy, and multiple-system atrophy (69). This approach in TBI may reveal some important regional covariance patterns from which quantitative thresholds can be derived.

Other approaches have focused on improving the measurement of PET imaging itself. For example, the estimation of glucose metabolism in 18F-FDG PET can be improved by assessing plasma tracer concentrations during the imaging time window. There was 25%–33% increased hypometabolism in TBI patients when plasma tracer concentration was included in the quantification (71). Importantly, this improved quantification of glucose metabolism correlated with level of consciousness.

These studies emphasize that novel quantitative and qualitative approaches may overcome current challenges in imaging of brain trauma and may enhance the utility of PET for the heterogeneous disease phenotypes commonly observed in TBI.

FUTURE DIRECTIONS

A lack of a mechanistic understanding of chronic TBI has posed challenges with interpreting the results of any single molecular imaging biomarker. We believe that future research should address the following issues: better target identification, improved analysis techniques using machine learning and artificial intelligence algorithms, and novel tracer development.

Better Target Identification

Multiple neural and molecular events follow TBI, such as axonal injury, energy crises, vascular impairments, blood–brain barrier disruptions, and inflammation via activation of microglia and astrocytes. It is not well understood which of these changes persist in a chronic phase and are subsequently associated with, or causal to, clinical symptoms. First, more consistent samples of individuals with and without clinical symptoms are needed, along with a detailed definition of the TBI itself. Then, a detailed program of imaging and nonimaging biomarkers that assess the differential processes triggered by TBI should be investigated to identify the biomarker most imperative for relating long-term consequences to brain injury. We believe that a better understanding of such substrates that underlie the cognitive and clinical phenotypes is necessary to advance disease understanding, infer potential long-term sequalae, and identify new and appropriate targets for molecular imaging.

Improved Analysis Techniques Using Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence Algorithms

Heterogeneous variations in observed patterns have challenged the distinct identification of a one-fits-all approach in TBI. Data-driven approaches such as machine-learning and artificial intelligence algorithms may improve quantification and determine which aspects most contribute to the distinction of TBI patients with and without long-term cognitive and clinical consequences. We speculate that such outcome measures may be best expressed in a threshold or ratio combining different biomarker information that gives rise to persistent neural, vascular, or molecular injury. Such methods require the development of large, well-characterized imaging databases, such as the TRACK-TBI (Transforming Research and Clinical Knowledge in Traumatic Brain Injury) study (72). However, that particular study has limited the imaging database to CT/MRI and, thus, does not include PET imaging modalities at this time.

Novel Tracer Development

It may be necessary to shift research efforts from established imaging biomarkers toward the development of novel tracers specific to TBI, TES, and CTE. One promising avenue that could potentially inform tracer development is the application of cryogenic electron microscopy. The imaging of the macromolecular structure of biomolecules has identified the common structure of tau pathology in different disease populations (39,73). Such techniques could potentially improve the definition of tau protein strains after TBI or in CTE and, subsequently, the development of tracers more specific to such targets. Another direction would be to develop tracers that can specifically and sensitively image cytoskeletal alterations. More subtle mechanisms such as deficits in axonal transport or microtubule stabilization, alterations in neuroplasticity, or disruption of cerebrovascular reactivity may underlie the observed heterogeneity in post-mTBI recovery. Such cytoskeletal characteristics might be important targets for future tracer development.

CONCLUSION

Brain trauma imaging is a diverse field that ranges from the clinical criteria for imaging in the assessment of acute TBI to research of biomarkers underlying the presence of symptoms in chronic mTBI, as well as the diagnosis of TES/CTE. The role of molecular imaging is not well established within these areas. The multitude of recent studies has indicated some common findings but also contradictory and disparate results with regard to imaging of TBI. In fact, no specific biomarker has emerged to aid in diagnosing injury or determining the prognosis of long-term behavioral profiles. Lastly, with respect to the development of future treatments for TBI, it is critical to establish such validated biomarkers, which can be implemented to evaluate treatment response and improvement in brain health.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We acknowledge contributions to this article from Satoshi Minoshima, MD, PhD, and Yoshimi Anzai, MD, of the University of Utah Department of Radiology and Imaging Sciences and from Elaine R. Peskind, MD, and Garth E. Terry, MD, of the Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center (MIRECC), VA Puget Sound Health Care System.

  • © 2023 by the Society of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Graham NS,
    2. Sharp DJ
    . Understanding neurodegeneration after traumatic brain injury: from mechanisms to clinical trials in dementia. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2019;90:1221–1233.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.
    1. Ng SY,
    2. Lee AYW
    . Traumatic brain injuries: pathophysiology and potential therapeutic targets. Front Cell Neurosci. 2019;13:528.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. Yokobori S,
    2. Hosein K,
    3. Burks S,
    4. Sharma I,
    5. Gajavelli S,
    6. Bullock R
    . Biomarkers for the clinical differential diagnosis in traumatic brain injury: a systematic review. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2013;19:556–565.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Risling M,
    2. Smith D,
    3. Stein TD,
    4. et al
    . Modelling human pathology of traumatic brain injury in animal models. J Intern Med. 2019;285:594–607.
    OpenUrl
  5. 5.↵
    1. Saatman KE,
    2. Duhaime A-C,
    3. Bullock R,
    4. et al
    . Classification of traumatic brain injury for targeted therapies. J Neurotrauma. 2008;25:719–738.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. 6.↵
    1. Tagliaferri F,
    2. Compagnone C,
    3. Korsic M,
    4. Servadei F,
    5. Kraus J
    . A systematic review of brain injury epidemiology in Europe. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2006;148:255–268.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. 7.↵
    1. Cuthbert JP,
    2. Harrison-Felix C,
    3. Corrigan JD,
    4. et al
    . Epidemiology of adults receiving acute inpatient rehabilitation for a primary diagnosis of traumatic brain injury in the United States. J Head Trauma Rehabil. 2015;30:122–135.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. Stiell IG,
    2. Wells GA,
    3. Vandemheen K,
    4. et al
    . The Canadian CT head rule for patients with minor head injury. Lancet. 2001;357:1391–1396.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. Manolakaki D,
    2. Velmahos GC,
    3. Spaniolas K,
    4. de Moya M,
    5. Alam HB
    . Early magnetic resonance imaging is unnecessary in patients with traumatic brain injury. J Trauma. 2009;66:1008–1012.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  10. 10.↵
    1. Smith DH,
    2. Hicks R,
    3. Povlishock JT
    . Therapy development for diffuse axonal injury. J Neurotrauma. 2013;30:307–323.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. 11.↵
    1. McKee AC,
    2. Cantu RC,
    3. Nowinski CJ,
    4. et al
    . Chronic traumatic encephalopathy in athletes: progressive tauopathy after repetitive head injury. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2009;68:709–735.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. 12.↵
    1. Ramos-Cejudo J,
    2. Wisniewski T,
    3. Marmar C,
    4. et al
    . Traumatic brain injury and Alzheimer’s disease: the cerebrovascular link. EBioMedicine. 2018;28:21–30.
    OpenUrl
  13. 13.↵
    1. Smith DH,
    2. Johnson VE,
    3. Stewart W
    . Chronic neuropathologies of single and repetitive TBI: substrates of dementia? Nat Rev Neurol. 2013;9:211–221.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  14. 14.↵
    1. Katz DI,
    2. Bernick C,
    3. Dodick DW,
    4. et al
    . National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke Consensus Diagnostic Criteria for Traumatic Encephalopathy Syndrome. Neurology. 2021;96:848–863.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  15. 15.↵
    1. Blennow K,
    2. Brody DL,
    3. Kochanek PM,
    4. et al
    . Traumatic brain injuries. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16084.
    OpenUrl
  16. 16.↵
    1. Corps KN,
    2. Roth TL,
    3. McGavern DB
    . Inflammation and neuroprotection in traumatic brain injury. JAMA Neurol. 2015;72:355–362.
    OpenUrl
  17. 17.↵
    1. Hoge CW,
    2. McGurk D,
    3. Thomas JL,
    4. Cox AL,
    5. Engel CC,
    6. Castro CA
    . Mild traumatic brain injury in U.S. soldiers returning from Iraq. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:453–463.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Bryden DW,
    2. Tilghman JI,
    3. Hinds SR
    . Blast-related traumatic brain injury: current concepts and research considerations. J Exp Neurosci. 2019;13:1179069519872213.
    OpenUrl
  19. 19.↵
    1. Nadel J,
    2. McNally JS,
    3. DiGiorgio A,
    4. Grandhi R
    . Emerging utility of applied magnetic resonance imaging in the management of traumatic brain injury. Med Sci (Basel). 2021;9:10.
    OpenUrl
  20. 20.↵
    1. Trifan G,
    2. Gattu R,
    3. Haacke EM,
    4. Kou Z,
    5. Benson RR
    . MR imaging findings in mild traumatic brain injury with persistent neurological impairment. Magn Reson Imaging. 2017;37:243–251.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Shenton ME,
    2. Hamoda HM,
    3. Schneiderman JS,
    4. et al
    . A review of magnetic resonance imaging and diffusion tensor imaging findings in mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Imaging Behav. 2012;6:137–192.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  22. 22.↵
    1. Petrie EC,
    2. Cross DJ,
    3. Yarnykh VL,
    4. et al
    . Neuroimaging, behavioral, and psychological sequelae of repetitive combined blast/impact mild traumatic brain injury in Iraq and Afghanistan war veterans. J Neurotrauma. 2014;31:425–436.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  23. 23.↵
    1. Smith LGF,
    2. Milliron E,
    3. Ho M-L,
    4. et al
    . Advanced neuroimaging in traumatic brain injury: an overview. Neurosurg Focus. 2019;47:E17.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  24. 24.↵
    1. Lin AP,
    2. Liao HJ,
    3. Merugumala SK,
    4. Prabhu SP,
    5. Meehan WP,
    6. Ross BD
    . Metabolic imaging of mild traumatic brain injury. Brain Imaging Behav. 2012;6:208–223.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. 25.↵
    1. Brown M,
    2. Baradaran H,
    3. Christos PJ,
    4. Wright D,
    5. Gupta A,
    6. Tsiouris AJ
    . Magnetic resonance spectroscopy abnormalities in traumatic brain injury: a meta-analysis. J Neuroradiol. 2018;45:123–129.
    OpenUrl
  26. 26.↵
    1. Skibsted AP,
    2. Amiri M,
    3. Fisher PM,
    4. et al
    . Consciousness in neurocritical care cohort study using fMRI and EEG (CONNECT-ME): protocol for a longitudinal prospective study and a tertiary clinical care service. Front Neurol. 2018;9:1012.
  27. 27.↵
    1. Yin Z,
    2. Romano AJ,
    3. Manduca A,
    4. Ehman RL,
    5. Huston J
    . Stiffness and beyond: what MR elastography can tell us about brain structure and function under physiologic and pathologic conditions. Top Magn Reson Imaging. 2018;27:305–318.
    OpenUrl
  28. 28.↵
    1. Underhill HR,
    2. Rostomily RC,
    3. Mikheev AM,
    4. Yuan C,
    5. Yarnykh VL
    . Fast bound pool fraction imaging of the in vivo rat brain: association with myelin content and validation in the C6 glioma model. Neuroimage. 2011;54:2052–2065.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  29. 29.↵
    1. Chen SHA,
    2. Kareken DA,
    3. Fastenau PS,
    4. Trexler LE,
    5. Hutchins GD
    . A study of persistent post-concussion symptoms in mild head trauma using positron emission tomography. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2003;74:326–332.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  30. 30.↵
    1. Komura A,
    2. Kawasaki T,
    3. Yamada Y,
    4. Uzuyama S,
    5. Asano Y,
    6. Shinoda J
    . Cerebral glucose metabolism in patients with chronic mental and cognitive sequelae after a single blunt mild traumatic brain injury without visible brain lesions. J Neurotrauma. 2019;36:641–649.
    OpenUrl
  31. 31.↵
    1. Chételat G,
    2. Arbizu J,
    3. Barthel H,
    4. et al
    . Amyloid-PET and 18F-FDG-PET in the diagnostic investigation of Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias. Lancet Neurol. 2020;19:951–962.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  32. 32.↵
    1. Mosconi L,
    2. Tsui WH,
    3. Herholz K,
    4. et al
    . Multicenter standardized 18F-FDG PET diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment, Alzheimer’s disease, and other dementias. J Nucl Med. 2008;49:390–398.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  33. 33.↵
    1. Johnson VE,
    2. Stewart W,
    3. Smith DH
    . Widespread τ and amyloid-β pathology many years after a single traumatic brain injury in humans. Brain Pathol. 2012;22:142–149.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. 34.↵
    1. Tran HT,
    2. LaFerla FM,
    3. Holtzman DM,
    4. Brody DL
    . Controlled cortical impact traumatic brain injury in 3xTg-AD mice causes acute intra-axonal amyloid-β accumulation and independently accelerates the development of tau abnormalities. J Neurosci. 2011;31:9513–9525.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  35. 35.↵
    1. Bischof GN,
    2. Dodich A,
    3. Boccardi M,
    4. et al
    . Clinical validity of second-generation tau PET tracers as biomarkers for Alzheimer’s disease in the context of a structured 5-phase development framework. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2021;48:2110–2120.
    OpenUrl
  36. 36.↵
    1. Gorgoraptis N,
    2. Li LM,
    3. Whittington A,
    4. et al
    . In vivo detection of cerebral tau pathology in long-term survivors of traumatic brain injury. Sci Transl Med. 2019;11:eaaw1993.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  37. 37.↵
    1. Marklund N,
    2. Vedung F,
    3. Lubberink M,
    4. et al
    . Tau aggregation and increased neuroinflammation in athletes after sports-related concussions and in traumatic brain injury patients: A PET/MR study. Neuroimage Clin. 2021;30:102665.
    OpenUrl
  38. 38.↵
    1. Takahata K,
    2. Kimura Y,
    3. Sahara N,
    4. et al
    . PET-detectable tau pathology correlates with long-term neuropsychiatric outcomes in patients with traumatic brain injury. Brain. 2019;142:3265–3279.
    OpenUrl
  39. 39.↵
    1. Falcon B,
    2. Zivanov J,
    3. Zhang W,
    4. et al
    . Novel tau filament fold in chronic traumatic encephalopathy encloses hydrophobic molecules. Nature. 2019;568:420–423.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. 40.↵
    1. Gatson JW,
    2. Stebbins C,
    3. Mathews D,
    4. et al
    . Evidence of increased brain amyloid in severe TBI survivors at 1, 12, and 24 months after injury: report of 2 cases. J Neurosurg. 2016;124:1646–1653.
    OpenUrl
  41. 41.↵
    1. Hong YT,
    2. Veenith T,
    3. Dewar D,
    4. et al
    . Amyloid imaging with carbon 11-labeled Pittsburgh compound B for traumatic brain injury. JAMA Neurol. 2014;71:23–31.
    OpenUrl
  42. 42.↵
    1. Asken BM,
    2. Mantyh WG,
    3. La Joie R,
    4. et al
    . Association of remote mild traumatic brain injury with cortical amyloid burden in clinically normal older adults. Brain Imaging Behav. 2021;15:2417–2425.
    OpenUrl
  43. 43.↵
    1. Schneider ALC,
    2. Selvin E,
    3. Liang M,
    4. et al
    . Association of head injury with brain amyloid deposition: the ARIC-PET study. J Neurotrauma. 2019;36:2549–2557.
    OpenUrl
  44. 44.↵
    1. Loane DJ,
    2. Pocivavsek A,
    3. Moussa CE-H,
    4. et al
    . Amyloid precursor protein secretases as therapeutic targets for traumatic brain injury. Nat Med. 2009;15:377–379.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. 45.↵
    1. Ramlackhansingh AF,
    2. Brooks DJ,
    3. Greenwood RJ,
    4. et al
    . Inflammation after trauma: microglial activation and traumatic brain injury. Ann Neurol. 2011;70:374–383.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. 46.↵
    1. Coughlin JM,
    2. Wang Y,
    3. Minn I,
    4. et al
    . Imaging of glial cell activation and white matter integrity in brains of active and recently retired National Football League players. JAMA Neurol. 2017;74:67–74.
    OpenUrl
  47. 47.↵
    1. Scott G,
    2. Zetterberg H,
    3. Jolly A,
    4. et al
    . Minocycline reduces chronic microglial activation after brain trauma but increases neurodegeneration. Brain. 2018;141:459–471.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  48. 48.↵
    1. Kawai N,
    2. Maeda Y,
    3. Kudomi N,
    4. Yamamoto Y,
    5. Nishiyama Y,
    6. Tamiya T
    . Focal neuronal damage in patients with neuropsychological impairment after diffuse traumatic brain injury: evaluation using 11C-flumazenil positron emission tomography with statistical image analysis. J Neurotrauma. 2010;27:2131–2138.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  49. 49.↵
    1. Shiga T,
    2. Ikoma K,
    3. Katoh C,
    4. et al
    . Loss of neuronal integrity: a cause of hypometabolism in patients with traumatic brain injury without MRI abnormality in the chronic stage. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2006;33:817–822.
    OpenUrl
  50. 50.↵
    1. McGuire JL,
    2. Ngwenya LB,
    3. McCullumsmith RE
    . Neurotransmitter changes after traumatic brain injury: an update for new treatment strategies. Mol Psychiatry. 2019;24:995–1012.
    OpenUrl
  51. 51.↵
    1. Becker G,
    2. Dammicco S,
    3. Bahri MA,
    4. Salmon E
    . The rise of synaptic density PET imaging. Molecules. 2020;25:2303.
    OpenUrl
  52. 52.↵
    1. Bieniek KF,
    2. Cairns NJ,
    3. Crary JF,
    4. et al
    . The second NINDS/NIBIB consensus meeting to define neuropathological criteria for the diagnosis of chronic traumatic encephalopathy. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2021;80:210–219.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  53. 53.↵
    1. Glass JD,
    2. Hammers JL,
    3. Omalu BL,
    4. et al
    . Re: the second NINDS/NIBIB consensus meeting to define neuropathological criteria for the diagnosis of chronic traumatic encephalopathy. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2021;80(3):210–219. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2021;80:1007–1008.
    OpenUrl
  54. 54.↵
    1. Montenigro PH,
    2. Baugh CM,
    3. Daneshvar DH,
    4. et al
    . Clinical subtypes of chronic traumatic encephalopathy: literature review and proposed research diagnostic criteria for traumatic encephalopathy syndrome. Alzheimers Res Ther. 2014;6:68.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  55. 55.↵
    1. Mackay DF,
    2. Russell ER,
    3. Stewart K,
    4. MacLean JA,
    5. Pell JP,
    6. Stewart W
    . Neurodegenerative disease mortality among former professional soccer players. N Engl J Med. 2019;381:1801–1808.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  56. 56.↵
    1. Adams JW,
    2. Alvarez VE,
    3. Mez J,
    4. et al
    . Lewy body pathology and chronic traumatic encephalopathy associated with contact sports. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol. 2018;77:757–768.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  57. 57.↵
    1. Blecher R,
    2. Elliott MA,
    3. Yilmaz E,
    4. et al
    . Contact sports as a risk factor for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a systematic review. Global Spine J. 2019;9:104–118.
    OpenUrl
  58. 58.↵
    1. Asken BM,
    2. Rabinovici GD
    . Identifying degenerative effects of repetitive head trauma with neuroimaging: a clinically-oriented review. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2021;9:96.
    OpenUrl
  59. 59.↵
    1. Stern RA,
    2. Adler CH,
    3. Chen K,
    4. et al
    . Tau positron-emission tomography in former National Football League players. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:1716–1725.
  60. 60.↵
    1. Lesman-Segev OH,
    2. La Joie R,
    3. Stephens ML,
    4. et al
    . Tau PET and multimodal brain imaging in patients at risk for chronic traumatic encephalopathy. Neuroimage Clin. 2019;24:102025.
    OpenUrl
  61. 61.↵
    1. Marquié M,
    2. Agüero C,
    3. Amaral AC,
    4. et al
    . [18F]-AV-1451 binding profile in chronic traumatic encephalopathy: a postmortem case series. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2019;7:164.
    OpenUrl
  62. 62.↵
    1. Mantyh WG,
    2. Spina S,
    3. Lee A,
    4. et al
    . Tau positron emission tomographic findings in a former US football player with pathologically confirmed chronic traumatic encephalopathy. JAMA Neurol. 2020;77:517–521.
    OpenUrl
  63. 63.↵
    1. Krishnadas N,
    2. Doré V,
    3. Lamb F,
    4. et al
    . Case report: 18F-MK6240 tau positron emission tomography pattern resembling chronic traumatic encephalopathy in a retired Australian Rules football player. Front Neurol. 2020;11:598980.
  64. 64.↵
    1. Aguero C,
    2. Dhaynaut M,
    3. Normandin MD,
    4. et al
    . Autoradiography validation of novel tau PET tracer [F-18]-MK-6240 on human postmortem brain tissue. Acta Neuropathol Commun. 2019;7:37.
    OpenUrl
  65. 65.↵
    1. Bang SA,
    2. Song YS,
    3. Moon BS,
    4. et al
    . Neuropsychological, metabolic, and GABAA receptor studies in subjects with repetitive traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma. 2016;33:1005–1014.
    OpenUrl
  66. 66.↵
    1. Provenzano FA,
    2. Jordan B,
    3. Tikofsky RS,
    4. Saxena C,
    5. Van Heertum RL,
    6. Ichise M
    . F-18 FDG PET imaging of chronic traumatic brain injury in boxers: a statistical parametric analysis. Nucl Med Commun. 2010;31:952–957.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  67. 67.↵
    1. Weiner MW,
    2. Harvey D,
    3. Hayes J,
    4. et al
    . Effects of traumatic brain injury and posttraumatic stress disorder on development of Alzheimer’s disease in Vietnam veterans using the Alzheimer’s Disease Neuroimaging Initiative: preliminary report. Alzheimers Dement (N Y). 2017;3:177–188.
    OpenUrl
  68. 68.↵
    1. Sugarman MA,
    2. McKee AC,
    3. Stein TD,
    4. et al
    . Failure to detect an association between self-reported traumatic brain injury and Alzheimer’s disease neuropathology and dementia. Alzheimers Dement. 2019;15:686–698.
    OpenUrl
  69. 69.↵
    1. Spetsieris PG,
    2. Eidelberg D
    . Scaled subprofile modeling of resting state imaging data in Parkinson’s disease: methodological issues. Neuroimage. 2011;54:2899–2914.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  70. 70.↵
    1. Hammes J,
    2. Bischof GN,
    3. Bohn KP,
    4. et al
    . One-stop shop: 18F-flortaucipir PET differentiates amyloid-positive and -negative forms of neurodegenerative diseases. J Nucl Med. 2021;62:240–246.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  71. 71.↵
    1. Madsen K,
    2. Hesby S,
    3. Poulsen I,
    4. et al
    . Comparison of analytical methods of brain [18F]FDG-PET after severe traumatic brain injury. J Neurosci Methods. 2017;291:176–181.
    OpenUrl
  72. 72.↵
    1. Yuh EL,
    2. Jain S,
    3. Sun X,
    4. et al
    . Pathological computed tomography features associated with adverse outcomes after mild traumatic brain injury: a TRACK-TBI study with external validation in CENTER-TBI. JAMA Neurol. 2021;78:1137–1148.
    OpenUrl
  73. 73.↵
    1. Goedert M,
    2. Eisenberg DS,
    3. Crowther RA
    . Propagation of tau aggregates and neurodegeneration. Annu Rev Neurosci. 2017;40:189–210.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  • Received for publication March 30, 2022.
  • Revision received September 2, 2022.
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine: 64 (1)
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 64, Issue 1
January 1, 2023
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Brain Trauma Imaging
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Brain Trauma Imaging
Gérard N. Bischof, Donna J. Cross
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jan 2023, 64 (1) 20-29; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.121.263293

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Brain Trauma Imaging
Gérard N. Bischof, Donna J. Cross
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Jan 2023, 64 (1) 20-29; DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.121.263293
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ACUTE AND SECONDARY FEATURES OF TRAUMATIC BRAIN INJURY
    • IMAGING IN TBI RESEARCH
    • IMAGE ANALYSIS AND CHALLENGES
    • FUTURE DIRECTIONS
    • CONCLUSION
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Supplemental
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Total-body Dynamic Imaging and Kinetic Modeling of 18F-AraG in Healthy Individuals and a Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patient Undergoing Anti-PD-1 Immunotherapy
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • traumatic brain injury
  • Molecular imaging
  • chronic traumatic encephalopathy
SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire