4.3 Article

Time course of VCAM-1 and ICAM-1 in CSF in patients with basal ganglia haemorrhage

期刊

ACTA NEUROLOGICA SCANDINAVICA
卷 116, 期 1, 页码 49-55

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0404.2006.00790.x

关键词

adhesion molecules; basal ganglia haemorrhage; cerebrospinal fluid

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives - In a pilot study we found a correlation of the clinical outcome with adhesion molecule (AM) concentrations in ventricular cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) but not in serum in patients with intracerebral haemorrhage. We now determined the time course of AM concentration in CSF and serum after basal ganglia haemorrhage (BGH) in order to further uncover pathogenetic mechanisms. Materials and methods - We included 11 patients with acute BGH and ventricular tamponade in which an extraventricular drainage had been applied to treat ventricular ballonade. Paired CSF and serum samples were obtained within 8 h after onset of BGH, as well as on the consecutive days 2, 4, 6, and 8, respectively. The concentrations of soluble ICAM-1 (sICAM-1) and VCAM-1 (sVCAM-1) in CSF and serum were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Moreover, we determined blood volume and perifocal oedema by a semi-automated planimetry technique from initial cranial computed tomography scans. Results - sICAM-1 and sVCAM-1 levels in CSF were highest within the first hours after onset of BGH, then decreased significantly (P < 0.005 and < 0.05, respectively) on day 2 and slightly increased thereafter. Furthermore, BGH volume was significantly correlated with the concentrations of sICAM-1 (r = 0.63, P < 0.05) and sVCAM-1 (r = 0.66, P < 0.05) in ventricular CSF but not in serum. Conclusions - Our results might indicate that the local inflammatory reaction is pronounced early after onset of BGH and appears to be restricted to the central nervous system. Moreover, AM concentrations measured early after BGH onset correlated stronger with radiological and clinical data than follow-up measurements.

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

4.3
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