Abstract summary 

Determine the role of fluid-based biomarkers, advanced neuroimaging, genetic testing and emerging technologies in defining and assessing neurobiological recovery after sport-related concussion (SRC).Systematic review.Searches of seven databases from 1 January 2001 through 24 March 2022 using keywords and index terms relevant to concussion, sports and neurobiological recovery. Separate reviews were conducted for studies involving neuroimaging, fluid biomarkers, genetic testing and emerging technologies. A standardised method and data extraction tool was used to document the study design, population, methodology and results. Reviewers also rated the risk of bias and quality of each study.Studies were included if they: (1) were published in English; (2) represented original research; (3) involved human research; (4) pertained only to SRC; (5) included data involving neuroimaging (including electrophysiological testing), fluid biomarkers or genetic testing or other advanced technologies used to assess neurobiological recovery after SRC; (6) had a minimum of one data collection point within 6 months post-SRC; and (7) contained a minimum sample size of 10 participants.A total of 205 studies met inclusion criteria, including 81 neuroimaging, 50 fluid biomarkers, 5 genetic testing, 73 advanced technologies studies (4 studies overlapped two separate domains). Numerous studies have demonstrated the ability of neuroimaging and fluid-based biomarkers to detect the acute effects of concussion and to track neurobiological recovery after injury. Recent studies have also reported on the diagnostic and prognostic performance of emerging technologies in the assessment of SRC. In sum, the available evidence reinforces the theory that physiological recovery may persist beyond clinical recovery after SRC. The potential role of genetic testing remains unclear based on limited research.Advanced neuroimaging, fluid-based biomarkers, genetic testing and emerging technologies are valuable research tools for the study of SRC, but there is not sufficient evidence to recommend their use in clinical practice.CRD42020164558.

Authors & Co-authors:  Tabor Jason B JB Brett Benjamin L BL Nelson Lindsay L Meier Timothy T Penner Linden C LC Mayer Andrew R AR Echemendia Ruben J RJ McAllister Thomas T Meehan William P WP Patricios Jon J Makdissi Michael M Bressan Silvia S Davis Gavin A GA Premji Zahra Z Schneider Kathryn J KJ Zetterberg Henrik H McCrea Michael M

Study Outcome 

Source Link: Visit source