A ventricular drainage falsifies the serum concentrations of S100 and NSE will not be known. The aim of this study was to get additional information in this field. Methods: Within this potential study we incorporated 10 individuals (five women, five men, imply age 53.7 years) suffering from SAH (n = 5), ICB (n = 2), hydrocephalus (n = two) and ischemia (n = 1). All sufferers underwent a ventricular tapping and an insertion of a ventricular drainage. Serum samples for estimation of S100 and NSE were collected before, straight following and 6 hours soon after insertion on the drainage. Moreover we investigated the liquor directly after and 6 hours soon after insertion for S100 and NSE concentrations. The samples have been analyzed by using the Liaison kits (Byk-Sangtec, Dietzenbach, Germany). For statistical operate up we employed the t-test. Final results: None from the individuals showed a drastically enhanced S100 or NSE serum concentration immediately after insertion in the drainage. The mean serum value of S100 before insertion was 0.49 /l, directly after 0.42 /l and six hours later 0.49 /l. The mean serum concentration of NSE just before insertion was 18 /l, directly just after 13.9 /l and 6 hours later 9.8 /l. The concentration ofAvailable on-line http://ccforum.com/supplements/6/SNSE in the cerebrospinal fluid straight following insertion have been considerably greater compared to the serum concentration (85 /l versus 13.9 /l, imply, P < 0.05). The S100 concentration in the liquor was also higher, but failed to be statistically significant (418.8 /l versus 0.42 /l, mean).Conclusion: Due to our preliminary results, the serum values of S100 and NSE seem not to be falsified by insertion of a ventricular drainage. So the prognostic value of these serum markers seems to be preserved despite the surgical manipulation. In addition the concentrations of these markers in the cerebrospinal fluid seem to be exceedingly higher compared to the serum concentrations, probably reflecting an intact blood rain barrier.PSerum S100B as a marker of brain damage in the trauma intensive care unitLE Pelinka*, H Redl, A Kr fl, W Mauritz* *Department of Anesthesia and Critical Care Medicine, Lorenz B ler Trauma Center, Vienna, Austria; Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Experimental and Clinical Traumatology, Vienna, Austria; PGE2 custom synthesis Salzburg Trauma Center, PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20724831 Salzburg, Austria Introduction: Although pc tomography (CT) is actually a reputable and accurate technique of assessing brain damage immediately after trauma, it also exposes the critically ill patient to considerable pressure and is as a result unsuitable for frequent follow-ups. The intensivist managing severe traumatic brain injury calls for a marker which is trusted, repeatable and non-invasive. Our aim was to determine no matter whether S100B might be such a marker in the intensive care setting, both for isolated traumatic brain injury and for traumatic brain injury with further several trauma. Solutions: Ninety-five critically injured patients have already been incorporated within this ongoing multi-center prospective study and assigned to one of three groups, as outlined by their pattern of injury: Group 1: Isolated traumatic brain injury (n = 50) Group two: Traumatic brain injury in combination with numerous trauma (n = 35) Group 3 (controls): Many trauma without the need of traumatic brain injury (n = 10). All sufferers are examined by CT on admission. S100B values are determined during the initial hours immediately after trauma and every day thereafter to get a maximum of three weeks and in comparison with clinical, neurological and laboratory findings and to CT. Final results: S100B is ele.