Jacqueline Porteny1, Elicenda Tovar2, Samuel Lin2,3, Afifa Anwar2,4, Nico Osier5,6. 1. The University of Texas at Austin College of Liberal Arts, Austin, TX, USA. 2. The University of Texas at Austin College of Natural Sciences, Austin, TX, USA. 3. Dell Medical School, Austin, TX, USA. 4. The University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio School of Dentistry, San Antonio, TX, USA. 5. The University of Texas at Austin School of Nursing, Austin, TX, USA. nicoosier@utexas.edu. 6. Department of Neurology, Dell Medical School, Austin, TX, USA. nicoosier@utexas.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Traumatic brain injuries are physical injuries to the head that result in disruptions to normal brain function. Diagnostic tools such as computed tomography scans have commonly been used to detect traumatic brain injuries but are costly and not ubiquitously available. Recent research on diagnostic alternatives has focused on using salivary biomarkers, but there is no consensus on the utility of these methods. The objective of this manuscript is to address the gap in the literature pertaining to the effectiveness of salivary biomarkers for TBI diagnosis and prognosis. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted between November 2020 and October 2021 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Six databases were searched using the terms "traumatic brain injury," "TBI," "saliva," and "biomarkers." Literature published prior to 2010 was excluded, and two authors reviewed each full-text article to ensure its relevance. RESULTS: A total of 18 articles were included in this review, with nine articles on salivary microRNA, three on salivary hormones, three on salivary extracellular vesicles, and three on salivary proteins. CONCLUSIONS: Studies reported changes in salivary biomarkers after traumatic brain injuries and indicated a possible link between salivary biomarker expression and traumatic brain injury severity. However, it is unclear the degree to which salivary biomarkers accurately predict traumatic brain injury diagnosis and prognosis; some studies reported significant associations while others reported weaker associations. More research into the robustness of salivary biomarkers is needed to fully elucidate their utility for the traumatic brain injury population.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Traumatic brain injuries are physical injuries to the head that result in disruptions to normal brain function. Diagnostic tools such as computed tomography scans have commonly been used to detect traumatic brain injuries but are costly and not ubiquitously available. Recent research on diagnostic alternatives has focused on using salivary biomarkers, but there is no consensus on the utility of these methods. The objective of this manuscript is to address the gap in the literature pertaining to the effectiveness of salivary biomarkers for TBI diagnosis and prognosis. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted between November 2020 and October 2021 using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Six databases were searched using the terms "traumatic brain injury," "TBI," "saliva," and "biomarkers." Literature published prior to 2010 was excluded, and two authors reviewed each full-text article to ensure its relevance. RESULTS: A total of 18 articles were included in this review, with nine articles on salivary microRNA, three on salivary hormones, three on salivary extracellular vesicles, and three on salivary proteins. CONCLUSIONS: Studies reported changes in salivary biomarkers after traumatic brain injuries and indicated a possible link between salivary biomarker expression and traumatic brain injury severity. However, it is unclear the degree to which salivary biomarkers accurately predict traumatic brain injury diagnosis and prognosis; some studies reported significant associations while others reported weaker associations. More research into the robustness of salivary biomarkers is needed to fully elucidate their utility for the traumatic brain injury population.
Authors: C E Teunissen; A Petzold; J L Bennett; F S Berven; L Brundin; M Comabella; D Franciotta; J L Frederiksen; J O Fleming; R Furlan; R Q Hintzen; S G Hughes; M H Johnson; E Krasulova; J Kuhle; M C Magnone; C Rajda; K Rejdak; H K Schmidt; V van Pesch; E Waubant; C Wolf; G Giovannoni; B Hemmer; H Tumani; F Deisenhammer Journal: Neurology Date: 2009-12-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Noah D Silverberg; Grant L Iverson; Jeffrey R Brubacher; Elizabeth Holland; Lisa Casagrande Hoshino; Angela Aquino; Rael T Lange Journal: J Head Trauma Rehabil Date: 2016 Nov/Dec Impact factor: 2.710