• Neurocritical care · Oct 2013

    Serum Neuron-Specific Enolase Levels from the Same Patients Differ Between Laboratories: Assessment of a Prospective Post-cardiac Arrest Cohort.

    • Michael Mlynash, Marion S Buckwalter, Ami Okada, Anna Finley Caulfield, Chitra Venkatasubramanian, Irina Eyngorn, Marcel M Verbeek, and Christine A C Wijman.
    • Stanford Neurocritical Care Program, Stanford Stroke Center, Department of Neurology and Neurological Sciences, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, USA.
    • Neurocrit Care. 2013 Oct 1;19(2):161-6.

    BackgroundIn comatose post-cardiac arrest patients, a serum neuron-specific enolase (NSE) level of >33 μg/L within 72 h was identified as a reliable marker for poor outcome in a large Dutch study (PROPAC), and this level was subsequently adopted in an American Academy of Neurology practice parameter. Later studies reported that NSE >33 μg/L is not a reliable predictor of poor prognosis. To test whether different clinical laboratories contribute to this variability, we compared NSE levels from the laboratory used in the PROPAC study (DLM-Nijmegen) with those of our hospital's laboratory (ARUP) using paired blood samples.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled cardiac arrest patients who remained comatose after resuscitation. During the first 3 days, paired blood samples for serum NSE were drawn at a median of 10 min apart. After standard preparation for each lab, one sample was sent to ARUP laboratories and the other to DLM-Nijmegen.ResultsFifty-four paired serum samples from 33 patients were included. Although the serum NSE measurements correlated well between laboratories (R = 0.91), the results from ARUP were approximately 30% lower than those from DLM-Nijmegen. Therapeutic hypothermia did not affect this relationship. Two patients had favorable outcomes after hypothermia despite NSE levels measured by DLM-Nijmegen as >33 μg/L.ConclusionsAbsolute serum NSE levels of comatose cardiac arrest patients differ between laboratories. Any specific absolute cut-off levels proposed to prognosticate poor outcome should not be used without detailed data on how neurologic outcomes correspond to a particular laboratory's method, and even then only in conjunction with other prognostic variables.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.