Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Evaluation of the Roche® Elecsys and the Diasorin® Liaison S100 kits in the management of mild head injury in the emergency room.

Clinical Biochemistry 2018 Februrary
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this single-center prospective study is to compare two commercially available S100ß kits (the Roche® Elecsys and the Diasorin® Liaison S100 kits) in terms of analytical and clinical performances in a population admitted in the emergency room for mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI).

MATERIAL AND METHOD: 110 patients were enrolled from September 2014 to May 2015. Blood sample draws were performed within 3h after head trauma and the study population was split into pediatric and adult subpopulations (>18years of age).

RESULTS: Although both kits correlated well, we observed a significant difference in terms of S100ß levels (P value<0.05) in both subpopulations. In the pediatric subpopulation, both kits showed elevated S100ß levels for the only patient (3.5%) who displayed abnormal findings on a CT-scan. However, we observed a poor agreement between both kits (Cohen's kappa=0.345, P value=0.077). In the adult subpopulation, a total of 10 patients (12.2%) had abnormal head computed tomography scans. Using the Roche® (cut off=0.1μg/L) and the Diasorin® (cut off=0.15μg/L) S100ß kits, brain injuries were detected with a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 65-100%) and 100% (95% CI: 63-100%) and a specificity of 15.28% (95% CI: 7.9-25.7%) and 24.64% (95% CI: 15-36.5) respectively. Finally, a moderate agreement was concluded between both kits (Cohen's kappa=0.569, P value=0.001).

CONCLUSION: Although a good correlation could be found between both kits, emergency physicians should be aware of discrepancies observed between both methods, making those immunoassays not interchangeable. Furthermore, more studies are still needed to validate cut off used according to technique and to age, especially in the population below the age of 2years.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app