Objective: To prospectively study S-100B and neuron specific enolase (NSE) levels in subjects treated for severe head injury (sTBI), and investigate the prognostic value of these biomarkers.
Methods: Subjects included in a prospective double blind randomised study for sTBI. Inclusion criteria: Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) ⩽8, age 15–70 years, first recorded cerebral perfusion pressure of >10 mm Hg and arrival <24 h after trauma. Subjects were treated with an intracranial pressure (ICP) targeted therapy. Blood samples for S-100B and NSE were drawn immediately after arrival and every 12 h for 5 days. Outcome was evaluated as Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) by independent staff at 3 and 12 months.
Results: 48 subjects, mean age 35.5 years, and median GCS 6 were included. The first blood sample was drawn at 15.6 (1.4) h after injury. Initial concentration of S-100B was 1.04 (0.21) μg/l and for NSE 18.94 (2.32) μg/l. The biomarkers were significantly higher in subjects with GCS 3 and in those who died compared with those with GCS 4–8 and GOS 2–5, respectively. Receiver operated characteristic curve analyses of the initial S-100B and NSE levels to GOS dichotomised as unfavourable (GOS 1–3) and favourable (GOS 4–5) showed a weak correlation: AUC 0.585 and 0.555, respectively. Using the dichotomisation dead (GOS 1)/alive (GOS 2–5), the AUC values were 0.687 and 0.734, respectively. Furthermore, a correlation was found between the biomarkers themselves and the biomarkers and ICP.
Conclusion: At 3 and 12 months after trauma, no differences in prognostic values between the markers were apparent nor was there any clinical significant value of the markers as predictors of clinical outcome.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Funding This study was financially supported by the Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University Hospital Research Found, Tore Nilsson Foundation, Kempe Foundation and Capio Research Foundation.
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval The study was approved by the local ethics committee at Umeå University Hospital (dnr 00–175).
Provenance and Peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.