The application of assessment of blast traumatic brain injury EEG power spectral analysis

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2016.01.012

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To determine whether EEG spectral analysis could be used for the analysis of animal models with blast traumatic brain injury.

Methods

We built animal traumatic model using TNT bomb without fragments.All the 15 goats were divided into 3 groups according their brain pathology change.We recorded EEG from the animals at the time before bomb exploring as well as 3 hours after blast.Then, we assessed EEG spectral differences from 1 to 30 Hz and compared EEG spectral with different groups, following with alculating the absolute power value in each band and (δ+ θ)/(α+ β) value.

Results

The injury group′s spectral power values with 3 Hz、4 Hz、5 Hz and 6 Hz were (6.55±2.82)μV、(4.71±0.93)μV、(3.47±0.76)μV and (2.82±0.54)μV.The healthy control group′s spectral power values with 3 Hz、4 Hz、5 Hz and 6 Hz were (3.20±0.58)μV、(3.16±0.40)μV、(2.66±0.34)μV and (2.15±0.10)μV.It′s of significant difference between the two groups, the P value was 0.031, 0.009, 0.049 and 0.026. The healthy control group′s spectral value of δ band was (3.20±0.99)μV and θ band was (2.27±0.64)μV and (δ+ θ)/(α+ β) was (1.35±0.46)μV.The injury group′s spectral value of δ band was (9.81±1.06)μV and θ band was (4.97±1.41)μV and (δ+ θ)/(α+ β) was (3.19±0.74)μV, which were significantly higher than the healthy control group(P=0.045, 0.048, 0.024). The no injury group′s spectral value of δ band was (3.01±0.93)μV and θ band was (2.31±0.80)μV and (δ+ θ)/(α+ β) was (1.47±0.32)μV, which were similar with the healthy control group (P=0.794, 0.940, 0.704).

Conclusion

EEG power spectral analysis can be used as a flexible tool to demonstrate the animal model with traumatic brain injury.

Key words: Quantitative electroencephalogram, EEG power spectra, Blast traumatic brain injury

Guanhua Li, Janmin Wang, Bingchang Li. The application of assessment of blast traumatic brain injury EEG power spectral analysis[J]. Chinese Journal of Diagnostics(Electronic Edition), 2016, 04(01): 41-44.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhzdxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-655X.2016.01.012

https://zhzdxdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2016/V04/I01/41

Figures/Tables 2

References 11

[1]	Long JB,Bentley TL,Wessner KA, et al.Blast overpressure in rats：recreating a battlefield injury in the laboratory[J]. J Neurotrauma, 2009, 26(6): 827-840.
[2]	Bardin JC,Fins JJ,Katz DI, et al.Dissociations between behavioural and functional magnetic resonance imaging-based evaluations of cognitive function after brain injury[J]. Brain, 2011, 134(Pt 3): 769-782.
[3]	Yuan H,Liu T,Szarkowski R, et al.Negative covariation between task-related responses in alpha/beta-band activity and BOLD in human sensorimotor cortex：an EEG and fMRI study of motor imagery and movements[J]. NeuroImage, 2010, 49(3): 2596-2606.
[4]	陈燕伟,王向宇,谢成金. 定量脑电图对重型颅脑创伤长期意识障碍患者的清醒评估[J]. 中华神经外科杂志, 2011, 27(1): 56-58.
[5]	Goldfine AM,Victor JD,Conte MM, et al.Determination of aware ness in patients with severe brain injury using EEG power spectral analysis[J]. Clin Neurophysiol, 2011, 122(11): 2157-2168.
[6]	Kalayci T. Wavelet preprocessing for automated neuraml network detection of EEG spikes[J]. IEEE Eng Med Biol mag, 1995: 160-166.
[7]	黄远桂,吴声伶. 临床脑电图学[M]. 西安: 陕西科学技术出版社，1984: 153-156.
[8]	Leon-Carrion J,Martin-Rodriguez JF,Damas-Lopez J, et al.Brain function in the minimally conscious state：a quantitative neurophys iological study[J]. Clin Neurophysiol, 2008, 119(7): 1506-1514.
[9]	Thickbroom GW,Mastaglia FL,Carroll WM, et al.Source deriva tion: application to topographic mapping of visual evoked poten tials[J]. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1984, 59(4): 279-285.
[10]	Schwartzman DJ,Kranczioch C. In the blink of an eye：the contribution of microsaccadic activity to the induced gamma band response[J]. Int J Psychophysiol, 2011, 79(1): 73-82.
[11]	Shackman AJ,McMenamin BW,Maxwell JS, et al. Identifying robust and sensitive frequency bands for interrogating neural oscilla tions[J]. Neuroimage, 2010, 51(4): 1319-1333.

频率(Hz)	对照组	损伤组	无损伤组	F值	P值
1	4.20±0.69	6.52±1.92	4.04±1.07	5.420	0.055
2	4.14±0.61	9.18±6.41	4.38±0.94	2.859	0.097
3	3.20±0.58	6.55±2.82^a	3.83±0.80	5.342	0.022
4	3.16±0.40	4.71±0.93^a	3.68±0.63	6.590	0.012
5	2.61±0.34	3.47±0.76^a	2.79±0.53	3.163	0.021
6	2.15±0.10	2.82±0.54^a	2.29±0.24	5.200	0.024
7	1.97±0.16	2.23±0.44	1.74±0.11	3.854	0.051
8	1.82±0.24	2.16±0.63	1.63±0.23	2.093	0.166
9	1.87±0.49	1.83±0.52	1.55±0.33	0.749	0.494
10	1.71±0.28	1.67±0.37	1.38±0.23	1.728	0.219
11	1.71±0.48	1.60±0.22	1.32±0.33	1.552	0.252
12	1.91±0.58	1.46±0.13	1.59±0.46	1.393	0.286
13	2.07±0.50	1.44±0.18	1.56±0.36	4.065	0.045
14	1.99±0.47	1.48±0.16	1.82±0.51	1.990	0.179
15	2.19±0.61	1.59±0.16	1.85±0.48	2.187	0.155
16	2.24±0.57	1.74±0.30	2.34±0.53	2.271	0.146
17	2.29±0.72	1.85±0.41	2.16±0.43	0.892	0.435
18	2.36±0.65	1.93±0.37	2.31±0.61	0.904	0.431
19	2.48±0.79	2.35±0.46	2.60±0.46	0.229	0.799
20	2.72±0.88	2.36±0.51	2.59±0.66	0.346	0.714
21	2.94±1.06	2.52±0.58	2.75±0.29	0.422	0.665
22	3.21±1.23	2.57±0.71	3.10±0.30	0.839	0.456
23	3.32±1.34	2.64±0.87	3.10±0.36	0.670	0.530
24	3.54±1.43	2.55±0.86	3.19±0.60	1.222	0.329
25	3.67±1.38	2.75±1.14	3.22±0.96	0.778	0.481
26	3.78±1.19	2.79±1.07	3.67±1.05	1.184	0.339
27	4.12±1.53	3.03±1.37	3.82±0.61	1.026	0.388
28	3.91±1.17	3.08±1.24	3.70±0.64	0.830	0.460
29	4.15±1.37	3.02±1.19	4.20±0.46	1.908	0.191
30	4.03±1.29	3.21±1.39	4.33±0.51	1.306	0.307

频率(Hz)	对照组	损伤组	无损伤组	F值	P值
1	4.20±0.69	6.52±1.92	4.04±1.07	5.420	0.055
2	4.14±0.61	9.18±6.41	4.38±0.94	2.859	0.097
3	3.20±0.58	6.55±2.82^a	3.83±0.80	5.342	0.022
4	3.16±0.40	4.71±0.93^a	3.68±0.63	6.590	0.012
5	2.61±0.34	3.47±0.76^a	2.79±0.53	3.163	0.021
6	2.15±0.10	2.82±0.54^a	2.29±0.24	5.200	0.024
7	1.97±0.16	2.23±0.44	1.74±0.11	3.854	0.051
8	1.82±0.24	2.16±0.63	1.63±0.23	2.093	0.166
9	1.87±0.49	1.83±0.52	1.55±0.33	0.749	0.494
10	1.71±0.28	1.67±0.37	1.38±0.23	1.728	0.219
11	1.71±0.48	1.60±0.22	1.32±0.33	1.552	0.252
12	1.91±0.58	1.46±0.13	1.59±0.46	1.393	0.286
13	2.07±0.50	1.44±0.18	1.56±0.36	4.065	0.045
14	1.99±0.47	1.48±0.16	1.82±0.51	1.990	0.179
15	2.19±0.61	1.59±0.16	1.85±0.48	2.187	0.155
16	2.24±0.57	1.74±0.30	2.34±0.53	2.271	0.146
17	2.29±0.72	1.85±0.41	2.16±0.43	0.892	0.435
18	2.36±0.65	1.93±0.37	2.31±0.61	0.904	0.431
19	2.48±0.79	2.35±0.46	2.60±0.46	0.229	0.799
20	2.72±0.88	2.36±0.51	2.59±0.66	0.346	0.714
21	2.94±1.06	2.52±0.58	2.75±0.29	0.422	0.665
22	3.21±1.23	2.57±0.71	3.10±0.30	0.839	0.456
23	3.32±1.34	2.64±0.87	3.10±0.36	0.670	0.530
24	3.54±1.43	2.55±0.86	3.19±0.60	1.222	0.329
25	3.67±1.38	2.75±1.14	3.22±0.96	0.778	0.481
26	3.78±1.19	2.79±1.07	3.67±1.05	1.184	0.339
27	4.12±1.53	3.03±1.37	3.82±0.61	1.026	0.388
28	3.91±1.17	3.08±1.24	3.70±0.64	0.830	0.460
29	4.15±1.37	3.02±1.19	4.20±0.46	1.908	0.191
30	4.03±1.29	3.21±1.39	4.33±0.51	1.306	0.307

组别	δ	θ	α	β	(δ＋θ)/(α＋β)
对照组	3.20±0.99	2.27±0.64	1.53±0.15	2.64±0.83	1.35±0.46
损伤组	9.81±1.06^a	4.97±1.41^a	2.37±0.61	2.05±0.215	3.19±0.74^a
无损伤组	3.01±0.93	2.31±0.80	1.32±0.26	2.28±0.78	1.47±0.32
F值	4.925	4.269	3.064	0.684	6.363
P值	0.040	0.049	0.103	0.532	0.022

组别	δ	θ	α	β	(δ＋θ)/(α＋β)
对照组	3.20±0.99	2.27±0.64	1.53±0.15	2.64±0.83	1.35±0.46
损伤组	9.81±1.06^a	4.97±1.41^a	2.37±0.61	2.05±0.215	3.19±0.74^a
无损伤组	3.01±0.93	2.31±0.80	1.32±0.26	2.28±0.78	1.47±0.32
F值	4.925	4.269	3.064	0.684	6.363
P值	0.040	0.049	0.103	0.532	0.022

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export