Normal values for pancreatic stone protein in different age groups.

BACKGROUND Pancreatic stone protein (PSP) has been identified as a promising sepsis marker in adults, children and neonates. However, data on population-based reference values are lacking. This study aimed to establish age-specific reference values for PSP. METHODS PSP was determined using a specific ELISA. PSP serum concentrations were determined in 372 healthy subjects including 217 neonates, 94 infants and children up to 16 years, and 61 adults. The adjacent categories method was used to determine which age categories had significantly different PSP concentrations. RESULTS PSP circulating levels were not gender-dependent and ranged from 1.0 to 99.4 ng/ml with a median of 9.2 ng/ml. PSP increased significantly between the age categories, from a median of 2.6 ng/ml in very preterm newborns, to 6.3 ng/ml in term newborns, to 16.1 ng/ml in older children (p < 0.001). PSP levels were higher on postnatal day three compared to levels measured immediately post delivery (p < 0.001). Paired umbilical artery and umbilical vein samples were strongly correlated (p < 0.001). Simultaneously obtained capillary heel-prick versus venous samples showed a good level of agreement for PSP (Rho 0.89, bias 19 %). CONCLUSIONS This study provides age-specific normal values that may be used to define cut-offs for future trials on PSP. We demonstrate an age-dependent increase of PSP from birth to childhood.

Joining the dots - understanding the complex interplay between the values we place on wildlife, biodiversity conservation, human and animal health: A review.

The value of wildlife has long been ignored or under-rated. However, growing concerns about biodiversity loss and emerging diseases of wildlife origin have enhanced debates about the importance of wildlife. Wildlife-related diseases are viewed through these debates as a potential threat to wildlife conservation and domestic animal and human health. This article provides an overview of the values we place on wildlife (positive: socio-cultural, nutritional, economic, ecological; and negative: damages, health issues) and of the significance of diseases for biodiversity conservation. It shows that the values of wildlife, the emergence of wildlife diseases and biodiversity conservation are closely linked. The article also illustrates why investigations into wildlife diseases are now recognized as an integral part of global health issues. The modern One Health concept requires multi-disciplinary research groups including veterinarians, human physicians, ecologists and other scientists collaborating towards a common goal: prevention of disease emergence and preservation of ecosystems, both of which are essential to protect human life and well-being.