4.5 Article

S-100B is superior to NSE, BDNF and GFAP in predicting outcome of resuscitation from cardiac arrest with hypothermia treatment

Journal

RESUSCITATION
Volume 82, Issue 1, Pages 26-31

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2010.10.011

Keywords

Hypothermia; Post-resuscitation period; Outcome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To conduct a pilot study to evaluate the blood levels of brain derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP), neuron specific enolase (NSE) and S-100B as prognostic markers for neurological outcome 6 months after hypothermia treatment following resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Design: Prospective observational study. Setting: One intensive care unit at Uppsala University Hospital. Patients: Thirty-one unconscious patients resuscitated after cardiac arrest. Interventions: None. Measurements and main results: Unconscious patients after cardiac arrest with restoration of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) were treated with mild hypothermia to 32-34 degrees C for 26 h. Time from cardiac arrest to target temperature was measured. Blood samples were collected at intervals of 1-108 h after ROSC. Neurological outcome was assessed with Glasgow-Pittsburgh cerebral performance category (CPC) scale at discharge from intensive care and again 6 months later, when 15/31 patients were alive, of whom 14 had a good outcome (CPC 1-2). Among the predictive biomarkers, S-100B at 24 h after ROSC was the best, predicting poor outcome (CPC 3-5) with a sensitivity of 87% and a specificity of 100%. NSE at 96 h after ROSC predicted poor outcome, with sensitivity of 57% and specificity of 93%. BDNF and GFAP levels did not predict outcome. The time from cardiac arrest to target temperature was shorter for those with poor outcome. Conclusions: The blood concentration of S-100B at 24 h after ROSC is highly predictive of outcome in patients treated with mild hypothermia after cardiac arrest. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available