Davide Campagna, Francesca Cucuzza, Giuseppe Fabio Martines, Lorena Amico, Monica Pennisi, Eva Francesca Aiello, Riccardo Polosa, Giuseppe Carpinteri
{"title":"The role of two brain injury biomarkers, GFAP and UCH-L1, for the management of mTBI in the Emergency Department: an observational study.","authors":"Davide Campagna, Francesca Cucuzza, Giuseppe Fabio Martines, Lorena Amico, Monica Pennisi, Eva Francesca Aiello, Riccardo Polosa, Giuseppe Carpinteri","doi":"10.1007/s11739-025-04000-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The management of the Emergency Department (ED) of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is currently challenging due to its clinical heterogeneity. The most rapid method to assess brain damage is to perform a brain computed tomography (CT) scan. Stratification scores, as the Canadian CT Head Rule or the New Orleans Criteria, can be used for a quick and safe rule-out for mTBI, but scientific literature highlights how these scores are misused in real life leading to perform useless brain CT scans with radiation exposure, even in patients who do not need it. In the last years, some scientific associations have suggested the use of a biomarker to help clinicians in decision-making in this field. Given these premises, in this study we evaluated the effectiveness of two biomarkers, the glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and the ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1), in predicting the necessity of performing a CT scan of the brain in the study population calculated as Negative Predictive Value (NPV) compared to CT scan reports. From January 2023, we enrolled 101 participants with mTBI who underwent a brain CT scan and blood test to assess levels of two biomarkers at the ED of Policlinico Teaching Hospital of Catania, Italy. 17 participants had a positive brain CT scan report. Of these, 13 reported an \"elevated\" levels of biomarkers, and 4 a \"not elevated\" levels leading to an NPV of 86.6%. A specialist neuroradiologist reassessed, in blind, all CT scans leading to the re-evaluation of 9 CT scans, initially reported as positive by the ED radiologist, which were then reassessed as negative. The results yielded an NPV of 100%. Our study suggests that GFAP and UCH-L1 can be effectively used in the management of patients with mTBI for a rapid and safe rule-out of the patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":13662,"journal":{"name":"Internal and Emergency Medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Internal and Emergency Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11739-025-04000-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The management of the Emergency Department (ED) of patients with mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI) is currently challenging due to its clinical heterogeneity. The most rapid method to assess brain damage is to perform a brain computed tomography (CT) scan. Stratification scores, as the Canadian CT Head Rule or the New Orleans Criteria, can be used for a quick and safe rule-out for mTBI, but scientific literature highlights how these scores are misused in real life leading to perform useless brain CT scans with radiation exposure, even in patients who do not need it. In the last years, some scientific associations have suggested the use of a biomarker to help clinicians in decision-making in this field. Given these premises, in this study we evaluated the effectiveness of two biomarkers, the glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) and the ubiquitin carboxy-terminal hydrolase L1 (UCH-L1), in predicting the necessity of performing a CT scan of the brain in the study population calculated as Negative Predictive Value (NPV) compared to CT scan reports. From January 2023, we enrolled 101 participants with mTBI who underwent a brain CT scan and blood test to assess levels of two biomarkers at the ED of Policlinico Teaching Hospital of Catania, Italy. 17 participants had a positive brain CT scan report. Of these, 13 reported an "elevated" levels of biomarkers, and 4 a "not elevated" levels leading to an NPV of 86.6%. A specialist neuroradiologist reassessed, in blind, all CT scans leading to the re-evaluation of 9 CT scans, initially reported as positive by the ED radiologist, which were then reassessed as negative. The results yielded an NPV of 100%. Our study suggests that GFAP and UCH-L1 can be effectively used in the management of patients with mTBI for a rapid and safe rule-out of the patients.
期刊介绍:
Internal and Emergency Medicine (IEM) is an independent, international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal designed for internists and emergency physicians. IEM publishes a variety of manuscript types including Original investigations, Review articles, Letters to the Editor, Editorials and Commentaries. Occasionally IEM accepts unsolicited Reviews, Commentaries or Editorials. The journal is divided into three sections, i.e., Internal Medicine, Emergency Medicine and Clinical Evidence and Health Technology Assessment, with three separate editorial boards. In the Internal Medicine section, invited Case records and Physical examinations, devoted to underlining the role of a clinical approach in selected clinical cases, are also published. The Emergency Medicine section will include a Morbidity and Mortality Report and an Airway Forum concerning the management of difficult airway problems. As far as Critical Care is becoming an integral part of Emergency Medicine, a new sub-section will report the literature that concerns the interface not only for the care of the critical patient in the Emergency Department, but also in the Intensive Care Unit. Finally, in the Clinical Evidence and Health Technology Assessment section brief discussions of topics of evidence-based medicine (Cochrane’s corner) and Research updates are published. IEM encourages letters of rebuttal and criticism of published articles. Topics of interest include all subjects that relate to the science and practice of Internal and Emergency Medicine.