Why the study?
Do angiopoietins serve as promising biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets in traumatic brain injury and sub-arachnoid hemorrhage?
Do angiopoietins serve as promising biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets in traumatic brain injury and sub-arachnoid hemorrhage?
Angiopoietins, specifically the Ang-1/Ang-2 ratio, represent promising biomarkers and potential therapeutic targets for managing secondary brain injury following TBI and SAH.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Should not change practice in TBI or SAH; leaves open diagnostic and therapeutic potential for prospective validation.
Traumatic brain injury (TBI) and sub-arachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) are major causes of long-term disability, mortality, and enormous economic costs to society. The full spectrum of neurological damage created by TBI or SAH is not usually manifested at the time of injury, but evolves gradually over the course of hours to days (or weeks) following these injuries. Angiopoietins, important regulators of vascular structure and function, are hallmark indicators of vascular injury and may therefore represent promising targets in the treatment of SAH and TBI. In animal models and human tissues, normal intracerebral and pial vessels show strong expression of Angiopoietin-1 (Ang-1), but only minimal expression or presentation of Angiopoietin-2 (Ang-2). After several types of neurotrauma, the ratios of Ang-1 and Ang-2 expression in brain microvessel are disturbed and appear to contribute to the remarkable loss of blood-brain barrier (BBB) in these injuries. Angiopoietins levels, and perhaps more importantly, Angiopoietin ratios (1:2) may have novel and important diagnostic and prognostic uses in TBI and SAH brain injury. Ang-1/2 evaluation in plasma, serum and cerebrospinal fluid may provide new therapeutic modalities which can modify 'secondary' forms of brain injury after TBI and SAH.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chittiboina et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: