Michael V DeFazio1, Richard A Rammo1, Jaime R Robles2, Helen M Bramlett1, W Dalton Dietrich1, M Ross Bullock3. 1. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA. 2. School of Pharmacy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia, USA. 3. Department of Neurological Surgery, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA. Electronic address: rbullock@med.miami.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a dynamic neuropathologic process in which a substantial proportion of patients die within the first 48-hours. The assessment of injury severity and prognosis are of primary concern in the initial management of severe TBI. Supplemental testing that aids in the stratification of patients at high risk for deterioration may significantly improve posttraumatic management in the acute setting. METHODS: This retrospective study assessed the utility of both single-marker and multimarker models as predictive indicators of acute clinical status after severe TBI. Forty-four patients who sustained severe TBI (admission Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score ≤ 8) were divided into two cohorts according to a dichotomized clinical outcome at 72 hours after admission: Poor status (death or GCS score ≤ 8) and improved status (GCS score improved to >8). Threshold values for clinical status prediction were calculated for serum S-100B, matrix metalloproteinase-9, and plasma D-dimer, upon admission and at 24 hours after TBI by the use of receiver operating characteristic analysis. Performance characteristics of these single-marker predictors were compared with those derived from a multimarker logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Biomarkers with the greatest predictive value for poor status at 72 hours included serum S-100B on admission, as well as plasma D-dimer and serum S-100B at 24 hours, for which, associations were strongly significant. Multimarker analysis indicated no substantial improvement in prediction accuracy over the best single predictors during this time frame. CONCLUSION: In conjunction with other clinical, physical, and radiologic evidence, blood-derived biochemical markers may serve to enhance prediction of early clinical trends after severe TBI.
OBJECTIVE:Severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a dynamic neuropathologic process in which a substantial proportion of patients die within the first 48-hours. The assessment of injury severity and prognosis are of primary concern in the initial management of severe TBI. Supplemental testing that aids in the stratification of patients at high risk for deterioration may significantly improve posttraumatic management in the acute setting. METHODS: This retrospective study assessed the utility of both single-marker and multimarker models as predictive indicators of acute clinical status after severe TBI. Forty-four patients who sustained severe TBI (admission Glasgow Coma Scale [GCS] score ≤ 8) were divided into two cohorts according to a dichotomized clinical outcome at 72 hours after admission: Poor status (death or GCS score ≤ 8) and improved status (GCS score improved to >8). Threshold values for clinical status prediction were calculated for serum S-100B, matrix metalloproteinase-9, and plasma D-dimer, upon admission and at 24 hours after TBI by the use of receiver operating characteristic analysis. Performance characteristics of these single-marker predictors were compared with those derived from a multimarker logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Biomarkers with the greatest predictive value for poor status at 72 hours included serum S-100B on admission, as well as plasma D-dimer and serum S-100B at 24 hours, for which, associations were strongly significant. Multimarker analysis indicated no substantial improvement in prediction accuracy over the best single predictors during this time frame. CONCLUSION: In conjunction with other clinical, physical, and radiologic evidence, blood-derived biochemical markers may serve to enhance prediction of early clinical trends after severe TBI.
Authors: K Nylén; M Ost; L Z Csajbok; I Nilsson; C Hall; K Blennow; B Nellgård; L Rosengren Journal: Acta Neurochir (Wien) Date: 2008-01-14 Impact factor: 2.216
Authors: Kelly L Dunn; Jonathan P Wolf; David M Dorfman; Patricia Fitzpatrick; James L Baker; Samuel Z Goldhaber Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2002-10-16 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Juan Pablo de Rivero Vaccari; Frank Brand; Stephanie Adamczak; Stephanie W Lee; Jon Perez-Barcena; Michael Y Wang; M Ross Bullock; W Dalton Dietrich; Robert W Keane Journal: J Neurochem Date: 2015-03-01 Impact factor: 5.372
Authors: Alexander Fletcher-Sandersjöö; Eric Peter Thelin; Marc Maegele; Mikael Svensson; Bo-Michael Bellander Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2021-04 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Alex P Di Battista; John E Buonora; Shawn G Rhind; Michael G Hutchison; Andrew J Baker; Sandro B Rizoli; Ramon Diaz-Arrastia; Gregory P Mueller Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2015-05-26 Impact factor: 4.003
Authors: Annunziato Mangiola; Vera Vigo; Carmelo Anile; Pasquale De Bonis; Giammaria Marziali; Giorgio Lofrese Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-08-31 Impact factor: 3.411