Dataset Information

Combination of initial neurologic examination, quantitative brain imaging and electroencephalography to predict outcome after cardiac arrest.

ABSTRACT: Prognosticating outcome following cardiac arrest is challenging and requires a multimodal approach. We tested the hypothesis that the combination of initial neurologic examination, quantitative analysis of head computed tomography (CT) and continuous EEG (cEEG) improve outcome prediction after cardiac arrest.Review of consecutive patients receiving head CT within 24h and cEEG monitoring between April 2010 and May 2013. Initial neurologic examination (Full Outline of UnResponsiveness_Brainstem reflexes (FOUR_B) score and initial Pittsburgh Post-Cardiac Arrest Category (PCAC)), gray matter to white matter attenuation ratio (GWR) on head CT and cEEG patterns were evaluated. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality.Of 240 subjects, 70 (29%) survived and 22 (9%) had a good neurologic outcome at hospital discharge. Combined determination of GW ratio and malignant cEEG had an incremental predictive value (AUC: 0.776 for mortality and 0.792 for poor neurologic outcome), with 0% false positive rate when compared with either test alone (AUC of GW ratio: 0.683 for mortality and 0.726 for poor outcome, AUC of malignant cEEG: 0.650 for mortality and 0.647 for poor outcome). Addition of FOUR_B or PCAC to this model improved prediction of mortality (p=0.014 for FOUR_B and 0.001 for PCAC) but not of poor outcome (p=0.786 for FOUR_B and 0.099 for PCAC).Combining GWR with cEEG was superior to any individual test for predicting mortality and neurologic outcome. Addition of clinical variables further improved prognostication for mortality but not neurologic outcome. These preliminary data support a multi-modal prognostic workup in this population.

SUBMITTER: Youn CS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5167630 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Combination of initial neurologic examination, quantitative brain imaging and electroencephalography to predict outcome after cardiac arrest.

Youn Chun Song CS Callaway Clifton W CW Rittenberger Jon C JC

Resuscitation 20161110

<h4>Background</h4>Prognosticating outcome following cardiac arrest is challenging and requires a multimodal approach. We tested the hypothesis that the combination of initial neurologic examination, quantitative analysis of head computed tomography (CT) and continuous EEG (cEEG) improve outcome prediction after cardiac arrest.<h4>Methods</h4>Review of consecutive patients receiving head CT within 24h and cEEG monitoring between April 2010 and May 2013. Initial neurologic examination (Full Outli ...[more]

PMID: 27840004

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundTo assess in comatose patients after cardiac arrest (CA) if amplitudes of two somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) responses, namely, N20-baseline (N20-b) and N20-P25, are predictive of neurological outcome.MethodsMonocentric prospective study in a tertiary cardiac center between Nov 2019 and July-2021. All patients comatose at 72 h after CA with at least one SSEP recorded were included. The N20-b and N20-P25 amplitudes were automatically measured in microvolts (µV), along with other recommended prognostic markers (status myoclonus, neuron-specific enolase levels at 2 and 3 days, and EEG pattern). We assessed the predictive value of SSEP for neurologic outcome using the best Cerebral Performance Categories (CPC1 or 2 as good outcome) at 3 months (main endpoint) and 6 months (secondary endpoint). Specificity and sensitivity of different thresholds of SSEP amplitudes, alone or in combination with other prognostic markers, were calculated.ResultsAmong 82 patients, a poor outcome (CPC 3-5) was observed in 78% of patients at 3 months. The median time to SSEP recording was 3(2-4) days after CA, with a pattern "bilaterally absent" in 19 patients, "unilaterally present" in 4, and "bilaterally present" in 59 patients. The median N20-b amplitudes were different between patients with poor and good outcomes, i.e., 0.93 [0-2.05]µV vs. 1.56 [1.24-2.75]µV, respectively (p < 0.0001), as the median N20-P25 amplitudes (0.57 [0-1.43]µV in poor outcome vs. 2.64 [1.39-3.80]µV in good outcome patients p < 0.0001). An N20-b > 2 µV predicted good outcome with a specificity of 73% and a moderate sensitivity of 39%, although an N20-P25 > 3.2 µV was 93% specific and only 30% sensitive. A low voltage N20-b < 0.88 µV and N20-P25 < 1 µV predicted poor outcome with a high specificity (sp = 94% and 93%, respectively) and a moderate sensitivity (se = 50% and 66%). Association of "bilaterally absent or low voltage SSEP" patterns increased the sensitivity significantly as compared to "bilaterally absent" SSEP alone (se = 58 vs. 30%, p = 0.002) for prediction of poor outcome.ConclusionIn comatose patient after CA, both N20-b and N20-P25 amplitudes could predict both good and poor outcomes with high specificity but low to moderate sensitivity. Our results suggest that caution is needed regarding SSEP amplitudes in clinical routine, and that these indicators should be used in a multimodal approach for prognostication after cardiac arrest.

Dataset Information

Combination of initial neurologic examination, quantitative brain imaging and electroencephalography to predict outcome after cardiac arrest.

Publications

Combination of initial neurologic examination, quantitative brain imaging and electroencephalography to predict outcome after cardiac arrest.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets