4.6 Article

A multiparameter panel method for outcome prediction following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage

期刊

INTENSIVE CARE MEDICINE
卷 36, 期 1, 页码 107-115

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00134-009-1641-y

关键词

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage; H-FABP; NDKA; S100 beta; Prognosis

资金

  1. Direction for Clinical Research of the Assistance Publique-Hopitaux de Paris
  2. Proteome Sciences plc

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Accurate early anticipation of long-term irreversible brain damage during the acute phase of patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) remains difficult. Using a combination of clinical scores together with brain injury-related biomarkers (H-FABP, NDKA, UFD1 and S100 beta), this study aimed at developing a multiparameter prognostic panel to facilitate early outcome prediction following aSAH. Blood samples of 141 aSAH patients from two separated cohorts (sets of 28 and 113 patients) were prospectively enrolled and analyzed with 14 months of delay. Patients were admitted within 48 h following aSAH onset. A venous blood sample was withdrawn within 12 h after admission. H-FABP, NDKA, UFD1, S100 beta and troponin I levels were determined using classical immunoassays. The World Federation of Neurological Surgeons (WFNS) at admission and the Glasgow Outcome Score (GOS) at 6 months were evaluated. In the two cohorts, blood concentration of H-FABP, S100 beta and troponin I at admission significantly predicted unfavorable outcome (GOS 1-2-3). A multivariate analysis identified a six-parameter panel, including WFNS, H-FABP, S100 beta, troponin I, NDKA and UFD-1; when at least three of these parameters were simultaneously above cutoff values, prediction of unfavorable outcome reached around 70% sensitivity in both cohorts for 100% specificity. The use of this panel, including four brain injury-related proteins, one cardiac marker and a clinical score, could be a valuable tool to identify aSAH patients at risk of poor outcome.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据