Dataset Information

Distinct predictive values of current neuroprognostic guidelines in post-cardiac arrest patients.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE:To assess the performance of neuroprognostic guidelines proposed by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), European Resuscitation Council/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ERC/ESICM), and American Heart Association (AHA) in predicting outcomes of patients who remain unconscious after cardiac arrest. METHODS:We retrospectively identified a cohort of unconscious post-cardiac arrest patients at a single tertiary care centre from 2011 to 2017 and reviewed hospital records for clinical, radiographic, electrophysiologic, and biochemical findings. Outcomes at discharge and 6 months post-arrest were abstracted and dichotomized as good (Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scores of 1-2) versus poor (CPC 3-5). Outcomes predicted by current guidelines were compared to actual outcomes, with false positive rate (FPR) used as a measure of predictive value. RESULTS:Of 226 patients, 36% survived to discharge, including 24 with good outcomes; 52% had withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies (WLST) during hospitalization. The AAN guideline yielded discharge and 6-month FPR of 8% and 15%, respectively. In contrast, the ERC/ESICM had a FPR of 0% at both discharge and 6 months. The AHA predictors had variable specificities, with diffuse hypoxic-ischaemic injury on MRI performing especially poorly (FPR 12%) at both discharge and 6 months. CONCLUSIONS:Though each guideline had components that performed well, only the ERC/ESICM guideline yielded a 0% FPR. Amongst the AAN and AHA guidelines, false positives emerged more readily at 6 months, reflective of continuing recovery after discharge, even in a cohort inevitably biased by WLST. Further assessment of predictive modalities is needed to improve neuroprognostic accuracy.

SUBMITTER: Zhou SE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6589093 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Distinct predictive values of current neuroprognostic guidelines in post-cardiac arrest patients.

Zhou Sonya E SE Maciel Carolina B CB Ormseth Cora H CH Beekman Rachel R Gilmore Emily J EJ Greer David M DM

Resuscitation 20190402

<h4>Purpose</h4>To assess the performance of neuroprognostic guidelines proposed by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), European Resuscitation Council/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ERC/ESICM), and American Heart Association (AHA) in predicting outcomes of patients who remain unconscious after cardiac arrest.<h4>Methods</h4>We retrospectively identified a cohort of unconscious post-cardiac arrest patients at a single tertiary care centre from 2011 to 2017 and reviewed hospital ...[more]

PMID: 30951843

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAmong cardiac arrest survivors, about half remain comatose 72 h following return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC). Prognostication of poor neurological outcome in this population may result in withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy and death. The objective of this article is to provide recommendations on the reliability of select clinical predictors that serve as the basis of neuroprognostication and provide guidance to clinicians counseling surrogates of comatose cardiac arrest survivors.MethodsA narrative systematic review was completed using Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. Candidate predictors, which included clinical variables and prediction models, were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of evidence. The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, Timing, Setting (PICOTS) question was framed as follows: "When counseling surrogates of comatose adult survivors of cardiac arrest, should [predictor, with time of assessment if appropriate] be considered a reliable predictor of poor functional outcome assessed at 3 months or later?" Additional full-text screening criteria were used to exclude small and lower-quality studies. Following construction of the evidence profile and summary of findings, recommendations were based on four GRADE criteria: quality of evidence, balance of desirable and undesirable consequences, values and preferences, and resource use. In addition, good practice recommendations addressed essential principles of neuroprognostication that could not be framed in PICOTS format.ResultsEleven candidate clinical variables and three prediction models were selected based on clinical relevance and the presence of an appropriate body of literature. A total of 72 articles met our eligibility criteria to guide recommendations. Good practice recommendations include waiting 72 h following ROSC/rewarming prior to neuroprognostication, avoiding sedation or other confounders, the use of multimodal assessment, and an extended period of observation for awakening in patients with an indeterminate prognosis, if consistent with goals of care. The bilateral absence of pupillary light response > 72 h from ROSC and the bilateral absence of N20 response on somatosensory evoked potential testing were identified as reliable predictors. Computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging of the brain > 48 h from ROSC and electroencephalography > 72 h from ROSC were identified as moderately reliable predictors.ConclusionsThese guidelines provide recommendations on the reliability of predictors of poor outcome in the context of counseling surrogates of comatose survivors of cardiac arrest and suggest broad principles of neuroprognostication. Few predictors were considered reliable or moderately reliable based on the available body of evidence.

Dataset Information

Distinct predictive values of current neuroprognostic guidelines in post-cardiac arrest patients.

Publications

Distinct predictive values of current neuroprognostic guidelines in post-cardiac arrest patients.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets