Literature DB >> 12948790

The prognostic value of evoked responses from primary somatosensory and auditory cortex in comatose patients.

F Logi1, C Fischer, L Murri, F Mauguière.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate somatosensory and auditory primary cortices using somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) and middle latency auditory evoked potentials (MLAEPs) in the prognosis of return to consciousness in comatose patients.
METHODS: SEPs and MLAEPs were recorded in 131 severe comatose patients. Latencies and amplitudes were measured. Coma had been caused by transient cardiac arrest (n=49), traumatic brain injury (n=22), stroke (n=45), complications of neurosurgery (n=12) and encephalitis (n=3). One month after the onset of coma patients were classified as awake, still comatose or dead. Three months after (M3), they were classified into one of the 5 categories of the Glasgow outcome scale (GOS).
RESULTS: At M3, 41.2% were dead, 47.3% were conscious (GOS 3-5) and 11.5% had not recovered consciousness. None of the patients in whom somatosensory N20 and auditory Pa were absent did return to consciousness and in the post-anoxic group, reduced cortical amplitude too was always associated with bad outcome. Conversely, N20 and Pa were present, respectively, in 33/69 and 34/69 patients who did not recover.
CONCLUSIONS: The prognostic value of SEPs and MLAEPs in comatose patients depends on the cause of coma. Measurement of response amplitudes is informative. Abolition of cortical SEPs and/or cortical MLAEPs precludes post-anoxic comatose patients from returning to consciousness (100% specificity). In any case, the presence of short latency cortical somatosensory or auditory components is not a guarantee for return to consciousness. Late components should then be recorded.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12948790     DOI: 10.1016/s1388-2457(03)00086-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol        ISSN: 1388-2457            Impact factor:   3.708


  19 in total

1.  [Patient in a posthypoxic vegetative state. Favorable outcome despite unfavorable prognostic parameters].

Authors:  E Sarpaczki; M Bertram; J Grüttner; T Brandt
Journal:  Nervenarzt       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 1.214

2.  The FOUR score predicts outcome in patients after cardiac arrest.

Authors:  Jennifer E Fugate; Alejandro A Rabinstein; Daniel O Claassen; Roger D White; Eelco F M Wijdicks
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 3.210

3.  Anoxic-ischemic encephalopathy: clinical and electrophysiological associations with outcome.

Authors:  G Bryan Young; Gordon Doig; Aldo Ragazzoni
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 3.210

Review 4.  Controversies in the care of children with acute brain injury.

Authors:  Steven Weinstein
Journal:  Curr Neurol Neurosci Rep       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 5.081

Review 5.  Post-anoxic vegetative state: imaging and prognostic perspectives.

Authors:  Mario Stanziano; Carolina Foglia; Andrea Soddu; Francesca Gargano; Michele Papa
Journal:  Funct Neurol       Date:  2011 Jan-Mar

6.  Let live or let die after traumatic coma: Scrutinizing somatosensory evoked potentials.

Authors:  Jacques Luauté; François Cotton; Jean-Jacques Lemaire; Laurence Tell; Jean Iwaz; Catherine Fischer; Nathalie André-Obadia
Journal:  Neurol Clin Pract       Date:  2012-03

Review 7.  Neurophysiological assessment of brain dysfunction in critically ill patients: an update.

Authors:  Eric Azabou; Catherine Fischer; Jean Michel Guerit; Djillali Annane; François Mauguiere; Fréderic Lofaso; Tarek Sharshar
Journal:  Neurol Sci       Date:  2017-01-21       Impact factor: 3.307

8.  Cognitive event-related potentials in comatose and post-comatose states.

Authors:  Audrey Vanhaudenhuyse; Steven Laureys; Fabien Perrin
Journal:  Neurocrit Care       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.210

Review 9.  Improving the clinical assessment of consciousness with advances in electrophysiological and neuroimaging techniques.

Authors:  Jodie R Gawryluk; Ryan C N D'Arcy; John F Connolly; Donald F Weaver
Journal:  BMC Neurol       Date:  2010-01-29       Impact factor: 2.474

10.  Ethics roundtable debate: child with severe brain damage and an underlying brain tumour.

Authors:  Scott Gunn; Satoru Hashimoto; Michael Karakozov; Thomas Marx; Ian K S Tan; Dan R Thompson; Jean-Louis Vincent
Journal:  Crit Care       Date:  2004-06-30       Impact factor: 9.097

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.