ArticleJA clinical reports2026
Beta-trace protein levels in epidural fluid and cerebrospinal fluid: a comparative analysis : Discriminative ability based on receiver operating characteristic analysis.
Article in JA clinical reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDistinguishing cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) from epidural fluid is important when the origin of aspirated fluid is uncertain during neuraxial procedures. We evaluated the discriminative ability of β-trace protein (BTP).
methodsEpidural samples were obtained via epidural catheters after local anesthetic administration, and CSF samples during spinal anesthesia. Glucose, total protein, and BTP were measured, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were performed.
resultsBTP levels were markedly higher in CSF than in epidural samples, with no overlap. Glucose overlapped between groups, whereas total protein showed limited differences. ROC analysis demonstrated excellent discrimination for BTP (AUC = 1.000) under the present study conditions, outperforming glucose (AUC = 0.904) and total protein (AUC = 0.633). For glucose, the optimal cutoff was 56.5 mg/dL (sensitivity 83.3%, specificity 90.0%). For BTP, any cutoff between 0.42-4.03 mg/L achieved 100% sensitivity and specificity within this dataset.
conclusionsBTP shows strong discrimination between CSF and epidural fluid.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.