IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0106680.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Prognostic Value of Serum Neuron-Specific Enolase in Traumatic Brain Injury: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Feng Cheng
  • Qiang Yuan
  • Jian Yang
  • Wenming Wang
  • Hua Liu

Abstract

Background: Several studies have suggested that neuron-specific enolase (NSE) in serum may be a biomarker of traumatic brain injury. However, whether serum NSE levels correlate with outcomes remains unclear. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the prognostic value of serum NSE protein after traumatic brain injury. Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched for relevant studies published up to October 2013. Full-text publications on the relationship of NSE to TBI were included if the studies concerned patients with closed head injury, NSE levels in serum after injury, and Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) or Extended GOS (GOSE) scores or mortality. Study design, inclusion criteria, assay, blood sample collection time, NSE cutoff, sensitivity and specificity of NSE for mortality prediction (if sufficient information was provided to calculate these values), and main outcomes were recorded. Results: Sixteen studies were eligible for the current meta-analysis. In the six studies comparing NSE concentrations between TBI patients who died and those who survived, NSE concentrations correlated with mortality (M.D. 0.28, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.21 to 0.34; I2 55%). In the eight studies evaluating GOS or GOSE, patients with unfavorable outcomes had significantly higher NSE concentrations than those with favorable outcomes (M.D. 0.24, 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.31; I2 64%). From the studies providing sufficient data, the pooled sensitivity and specificity for mortality were 0.79 and 0.50, and 0.72 and 0.66 for unfavorable neurological prognosis, respectively. The areas under the SROC curve (AUC) of NSE concentrations were 0.73 (95% CI, 0.66–0.80) for unfavorable outcome and 0.76 (95% CI, 0.62–0.90) for mortality. Conclusions: Mortality and unfavorable outcome were significantly associated with greater NSE concentrations. In addition, NSE has moderate discriminatory ability to predict mortality and neurological outcome in TBI patients. The optimal discrimination cutoff values and optimal sampling time remain uncertain because of significant variations between studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Feng Cheng & Qiang Yuan & Jian Yang & Wenming Wang & Hua Liu, 2014. "The Prognostic Value of Serum Neuron-Specific Enolase in Traumatic Brain Injury: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-15, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0106680
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0106680
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0106680
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0106680&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0106680?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Izabela Duda & Agnieszka Wiórek & Łukasz J. Krzych, 2020. "Biomarkers Facilitate the Assessment of Prognosis in Critically Ill Patients with Primary Brain Injury: A Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-15, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0106680. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.