Supplementary magnesium in traumatic brain injury: where do we go from here? ============================================================================ * David James Davies * magnesium * brain injury * trauma A key aspect of providing good quality care to patients who have sustained moderate to severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is taking on the heavy burden of electrolyte homeostasis for which their neuroaxis is temporarily unable to manage. Typically, the first focus of the neurosurgeon and neurointensivist is close regulation of sodium and potassium delivery and excretion due to the immediate and overwhelming influence of the neuroendocrine axis on these,1 2 together with the natural compartmental fluid shift that will accompany such changes and their effects on TBI outcome.3 4 However, much less clearly defined and understood is the influence of actively manipulating magnesium homeostasis in such cases. Current practice tends towards the avoidance of significant depletion; however, magnesium has a number of well-recognised interactions with major neurotransmitters such as glutamate, and through them has been identified as modulating the neuroinflammatory response through multiple in vivo models.5–7 From these observations, a considerable body of preclinical and pilot clinical evidence as to the positive effects of supplementary magnesium within the context of major neurological trauma has been assembled.8 9 Despite this promising data, unfavourable outcomes reported by key clinical studies10 suggest the translational relationship between experimental observations and clinical application is complex and not fully understood. Therefore, as yet the routine therapeutic use of magnesium supplementation is not within the current mainstream of TBI treatment.11 12 In response to the lack of clarity on this issue, Lyons *et al*13 present a summary of the current evidence regarding the use of supplemental magnesium within this context. Within the field of TBI research, there is a strong sense of feeling that magnesium represents a likely potential target for disease modifying therapy despite (as yet) the absence of a formal reference to support this. Lyons *et al* astutely point out that the fact that within this field many practitioners consider the case closed for supplemental magnesium (sulfate) due to a large (greater than 400 patient) randomised placebo controlled trial undertaken by Temkin *et al*,10 in which no benefit or indeed a slight adverse effect was observed in patients selected for treatment. This trial very much represents the fulcrum of judgement regarding this topic. However, the strength of evidence in preclinical models is very difficult to ignore and therefore stimulates an appetite to explore the potential oversights within what is considered the definitive literature. It is worth mentioning that a similar index of suspicion exists as to the utility of magnesium in the treatment of aneurysmal subarachnoid haemorrhage. In this situation also, a robust body of preclinical evidence has yet to translate into a measurable clinical benefit.14 A number of factors must be considered when attempting to offer an explanation to this lack of translatability. First, the dose relationship between potential beneficial effect, no effect and harm is likely to be complex and nuanced due to the significant influence the administration of magnesium has on multiple body systems (especially cardiovascular). Therefore, until a better understanding of the in vivo distribution and effects of specific dose regimes of magnesium are known (potentially through a mechanistic cerebral microdialysis study), any trial designed will potentially not hit the theoretical dose ‘sweet spot’ that may be required. TBI as a disease is very heterogeneous (although certain mechanisms of tissue injury will be common to most patterns of injury e.g cytoskeletal disruption, and loss of electrolytic membrane integrity), and therefore any future investigations into the potential role for supplemental magnesium may require more specific target stratification. Focal and semifocal injury patters such as those manifested by local contusion, or direct tissue disruption due to mechanical impingement, may have significantly different responses and requirements (with regard to electrolyte physiology) than a broadly diffuse and global insult such as those in large external hemispherical mass effect or diffuse axonal injury. Such careful injury phenotype selection may provide a clear answer to where any beneficial role for magnesium may lie and in whom. Such patient selection and stratification may not necessarily be via radiological/anatomical methods; biomarkers specifically characterising the immediate immune response to traumatic insult15 (particularly considering the inferred relevance of neuroinflammation to magnesium) may play a significant role in such experimental design. A key aspect (some may say a requirement) of in vivo (animal) TBI modelling is the homogeneity of the neuroaxial insult delivery.16 Each animal receives a carefully orchestrated impact, modelling with a range of insult mechanisms may elude to which ‘type’ of injury response better to which therapy. It should be mentioned here however that there are a number of different models of both focal and diffuse moderate/severe TBI in vivo, but investigations using them usually do so in isolation. This type of injury modelling may be considered as not entirely representative of the extremely variable/mixed system pattern of energy absorption seen in clinical TBI practice. It is therefore possible that these characteristics of preclinical modelling, together with inadequate patient selection stratification and injury phenotype identification may be contributing to the lack of beneficial effect seen in translational studies into the use of magnesium (and numerous other disease modifying agents for use in TBI). The review by Lyons *et al* within this issue represents a positive first step in revisiting this (potentially) suboptimally investigated topic. A better understanding of the current evidence, and an appreciation of the limitations of the studies, which represent it, is critical in order to proceed with better-designed investigations. TBI represents the most complex pattern of injury, in the most complex organ in the body17 (would this author had been so fortunate as to coin that phrase), and such needs the most intricate and comprehensive investigations to make meaningful progress. ## Footnotes * Contributors I am the sole author and compiler of this editorial document. * Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. * Competing interests None declared. * Patient consent Not required. * Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed. * Collaborators Antonio Belli, Kamal Yakoub, Valantina DiPietro. * Accepted May 15, 2018. * © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2018. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ## References 1. Maas AI, Stocchetti N, Bullock R. Moderate and severe traumatic brain injury in adults. Lancet Neurol 2008;7:728–41.[doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70164-9](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70164-9) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70164-9&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=18635021&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) [Web of Science](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000257969700020&link_type=ISI) 2. Van Beek JG, Mushkudiani NA, Steyerberg EW, et al. Prognostic value of admission laboratory parameters in traumatic brain injury: results from the IMPACT study. J Neurotrauma 2007;24:315–28.[doi:10.1089/neu.2006.0034](http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/neu.2006.0034) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1089/neu.2006.0034&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17375996&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) [Web of Science](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000245187900011&link_type=ISI) 3. Donkin JJ, Vink R. Mechanisms of cerebral edema in traumatic brain injury: therapeutic developments. Curr Opin Neurol 2010;23:293–9.[doi:10.1097/WCO.0b013e328337f451](http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/WCO.0b013e328337f451) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1097/WCO.0b013e328337f451&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20168229&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) 4. Earle SA, Proctor KG, Patel MB, et al. Ubiquitin reduces fluid shifts after traumatic brain injury. Surgery 2005;138:431–8.[doi:10.1016/j.surg.2005.06.026](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2005.06.026) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.surg.2005.06.026&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16213895&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) [Web of Science](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000232625600012&link_type=ISI) 5. Burd I, Breen K, Friedman A, et al. Magnesium sulfate reduces inflammation-associated brain injury in fetal mice. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;202:292.e1–292.e9.[doi:10.1016/j.ajog.2010.01.022](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2010.01.022) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20207246&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) 6. Muir KW. Glutamate-based therapeutic approaches: clinical trials with NMDA antagonists. Curr Opin Pharmacol 2006;6:53–60.[doi:10.1016/j.coph.2005.12.002](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.coph.2005.12.002) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.coph.2005.12.002&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16359918&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) [Web of Science](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000235502700009&link_type=ISI) 7. Dorsett CR, McGuire JL, DePasquale EA, et al. Glutamate neurotransmission in rodent models of traumatic brain injury. J Neurotrauma 2017;34:263–72.[doi:10.1089/neu.2015.4373](http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/neu.2015.4373) 8. Vink R, O’Connor CA, Nimmo AJ, et al. Magnesium attenuates persistent functional deficits following diffuse traumatic brain injury in rats. Neurosci Lett 2003;336:41–4.[doi:10.1016/S0304-3940(02)01244-2](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3940(02)01244-2) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0304-3940(02)01244-2&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=12493598&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) [Web of Science](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000180433900011&link_type=ISI) 9. Bareyre FM, Saatman KE, Raghupathi R, et al. Postinjury treatment with magnesium chloride attenuates cortical damage after traumatic brain injury in rats. J Neurotrauma 2000;17:1029–39.[doi:10.1089/neu.2000.17.1029](http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/neu.2000.17.1029) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1089/neu.2000.17.1029&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11101206&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) 10. Temkin NR, Anderson GD, Winn HR, et al. Magnesium sulfate for neuroprotection after traumatic brain injury: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet Neurol 2007;6:29–38.[doi:10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70630-5](http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70630-5) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S1474-4422(06)70630-5&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=17166799&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) [Web of Science](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000243039000016&link_type=ISI) 11. Marehbian J, Muehlschlegel S, Edlow BL, et al. Medical management of the severe traumatic brain injury patient. Neurocrit Care 2017;27:430–46.[doi:10.1007/s12028-017-0408-5](http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12028-017-0408-5) 12. Carney N, Totten AM, O’Reilly C, et al. Guidelines for the management of severe traumatic brain injury, fourth edition. Neurosurgery 2017;80:6–15.[doi:10.1227/NEU.0000000000001432](http://dx.doi.org/10.1227/NEU.0000000000001432) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1227/NEU.0000000000001432&link_type=DOI) 13. Lyons MWH, Blackshaw WJ. Does magnesium sulfate have a role in the management of severe traumatic brain injury in civilian and military populations? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J R Army Med Corps 2018. doi: 10.1136/jramc-2018-000916. [Epub ahead of print].[doi:10.1136/jramc-2018-000916](http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2018-000916) 14. Dorhout Mees SM, Algra A, Wong GK, et al. Early magnesium treatment after aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: individual patient data meta-analysis. Stroke 2015;46:3190–3.[doi:10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010575](http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.115.010575) [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6OToic3Ryb2tlYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI0Ni8xMS8zMTkwIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NDY6Ii9qcmFtYy9lYXJseS8yMDE4LzA2LzE2L2pyYW1jLTIwMTgtMDAwOTg1LmF0b20iO31zOjg6ImZyYWdtZW50IjtzOjA6IiI7fQ==) 15. Hazeldine J, Naumann DN, Toman E, et al. Prehospital immune responses and development of multiple organ dysfunction syndrome following traumatic injury: A prospective cohort study. PLoS Med 2017;14:e1002338.[doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002338](http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002338) 16. Xiong Y, Mahmood A, Chopp M. Animal models of traumatic brain injury. Nat Rev Neurosci 2013;14:128–42.[doi:10.1038/nrn3407](http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nrn3407) [CrossRef](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1038/nrn3407&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/external-ref?access_num=23329160&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fjramc%2Fearly%2F2018%2F06%2F16%2Fjramc-2018-000985.atom) 17. Wheble JL, Menon DK. TBI-the most complex disease in the most complex organ: the CENTER-TBI trial-a commentary. J R Army Med Corps 2016;162:87–9.[doi:10.1136/jramc-2015-000472](http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jramc-2015-000472) [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://militaryhealth.bmj.com/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NToianJhbWMiO3M6NToicmVzaWQiO3M6ODoiMTYyLzIvODciO3M6NDoiYXRvbSI7czo0NjoiL2pyYW1jL2Vhcmx5LzIwMTgvMDYvMTYvanJhbWMtMjAxOC0wMDA5ODUuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9)