Clinical and diagnostic findings in patients with elevated cerebrospinal bilirubin

Subarachnoid haemorrhage or traumatic lumbar puncture. Differentiation by cerebrospinal fluid parameters in a multivariable approach

Lumbar puncture (LP) is recommended in patients with thunderclap headache and negative computed tomography to rule out spontaneous subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH). Blood contamination of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) due to traumatic LP poses a diagnostic dilemma. Therefore, routine CSF parameters were investigated to distinguish between SAH and a traumatic LP. CSF red blood cell (RBC), white blood cell (WBC) count, total protein, CSF colour and supernatant were used for group comparisons of patients with SAH and 'symptomatic controls'. Due to variable time intervals between bleeding onset and LP in SAH patients in contrast to patients with traumatic LP, where blood contamination of CSF occurs at the time of LP, CSF variables were adjusted for decay in time to allow comparability. Logistic regression analysis identified bloody CSF [odds ratio (OR) 32.6], xanthochromic supernatant [OR 15.5] and WBCadjusted [OR 4.5 (per increase of 100/µl)] as predictors of SAH, while age, sex and CSF total proteinadjusted were no predictors. Optimal cut-point of RBCadjusted (determined at day 1 after bleeding) was > 3667/µl to identify SAH patients with a 97% sensitivity and 94% specificity. Combination of low RBC and clear CSF supernatant was found in none of SAH patients. Combined CSF RBC count and CSF supernatant reliably distinguished traumatic LP from SAH.

Detection of subarachnoid haemorrhage with spectrophotometry of cerebrospinal fluid - a comparison of two methods

OBJECTIVES

Spectrophotometric absorption curve analysis of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) for oxyhaemoglobin and bilirubin is necessary to accurately diagnose subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) in patients with typical symptoms but with negative findings on X-ray examinations. In this study, we evaluated the performance of two methods for interpreting absorption curves; one method from the United Kingdom National External Quality Assessment Service (UK-NEQAS) and the other from the national quality assurance programme in Sweden (Equalis).

METHODS

Consecutive absorbance curves (n=336) were interpreted with two different methods, and their performance was compared to the diagnosis as stated in the patient records.

RESULTS

The UK-NEQAS method displayed equal sensitivity to the Equalis method, but the specificity of the UK-NEQAS method was significantly higher than the Equalis method resulting in fewer false positive results. For UK-NEQAS, a positive predictive value (PPV) of 84.6% and a negative predictive value (NPV) of 99.7% were observed, whereas the Equalis method had a PPV of 27.5% and an NPV of 99.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The semi-automated method based on the guidelines from UK-NEQAS provides an efficient and correct interpretation of absorbance curves with short turn-around times. We propose using this method for the routine interpretation of CSF spectrophotometric curves.