OBJECTIVE: To compare electroencephalogram (EEG) symmetry values between stroke patients with different 28-day outcomes, and to assess correlations between clinical characteristics and 28-day outcomes. METHODS: Twenty-two patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke and persistent neurological deficits at EEG recording were incrementally included. At 28 days after admission, the modified Rankin scale (mRS) was used to evaluate the outcomes, based on which the patients were divided into two a posteriori groups, mRS = 6 and mRS <6. Student's t-test was used to compare these two groups in terms of brain symmetry index (BSI), National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS), Glasgow coma scale (GCS) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) assessed at admission. Then EEG parameters, NIHSS, GCS and APACHE II were correlated with the mRS. RESULTS: There were significant differences in BSI, NIHSS, GCS, and APACHE II between the two groups. Survivors had lower BSI, NIHSS and APACHE II, and higher GCS values, compared with patients who died within 28 days after admission. Besides, BSI at admission had a positive correlation with mRS at 28 days (r = 0.441, P = 0.040). NIHSS and APACHE II were also correlated with mRS (r = 0.736, P <0.000 1; r = 0.667, P = 0.001, respectively). GCS at admission had a negative correlation with mRS (r = -0.656, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A higher BSI predicts a poorer short-term prognosis for stroke patients. Acute EEG monitoring may be of prognostic value for 28-day outcomes. The early prediction of functional outcomes after stroke may enhance clinical management and minimize short-term mortality.
OBJECTIVE: To compare electroencephalogram (EEG) symmetry values between strokepatients with different 28-day outcomes, and to assess correlations between clinical characteristics and 28-day outcomes. METHODS: Twenty-two patients presenting with acute ischemic stroke and persistent neurological deficits at EEG recording were incrementally included. At 28 days after admission, the modified Rankin scale (mRS) was used to evaluate the outcomes, based on which the patients were divided into two a posteriori groups, mRS = 6 and mRS <6. Student's t-test was used to compare these two groups in terms of brain symmetry index (BSI), National Institutes of Health stroke scale (NIHSS), Glasgow coma scale (GCS) and acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II (APACHE II) assessed at admission. Then EEG parameters, NIHSS, GCS and APACHE II were correlated with the mRS. RESULTS: There were significant differences in BSI, NIHSS, GCS, and APACHE II between the two groups. Survivors had lower BSI, NIHSS and APACHE II, and higher GCS values, compared with patients who died within 28 days after admission. Besides, BSI at admission had a positive correlation with mRS at 28 days (r = 0.441, P = 0.040). NIHSS and APACHE II were also correlated with mRS (r = 0.736, P <0.000 1; r = 0.667, P = 0.001, respectively). GCS at admission had a negative correlation with mRS (r = -0.656, P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: A higher BSI predicts a poorer short-term prognosis for strokepatients. Acute EEG monitoring may be of prognostic value for 28-day outcomes. The early prediction of functional outcomes after stroke may enhance clinical management and minimize short-term mortality.
Authors: Jose Leon-Carrion; Juan Francisco Martin-Rodriguez; Jesus Damas-Lopez; Juan Manuel Barroso y Martin; Maria Rosario Dominguez-Morales Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2009-04-23 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Rishi V A Sheorajpanday; Guy Nagels; Arie J T M Weeren; Michel J A M van Putten; Peter P De Deyn Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2010-10-18 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: S E Kasner; J A Chalela; J M Luciano; B L Cucchiara; E C Raps; M L McGarvey; M B Conroy; A R Localio Journal: Stroke Date: 1999-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Cecile C de Vos; Susan M van Maarseveen; Paul J A M Brouwers; Michel J A M van Putten Journal: J Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2008-04 Impact factor: 2.177
Authors: Michel J A M van Putten; Jurriaan M Peters; Sandra M Mulder; Jan A M de Haas; Cornelis M A Bruijninckx; Dénes L J Tavy Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Amanda A Vatinno; Annie Simpson; Viswanathan Ramakrishnan; Heather S Bonilha; Leonardo Bonilha; Na Jin Seo Journal: Neurorehabil Neural Repair Date: 2022-03-20 Impact factor: 3.919
Authors: Jennifer Wu; Ramesh Srinivasan; Erin Burke Quinlan; Ana Solodkin; Steven L Small; Steven C Cramer Journal: J Neurophysiol Date: 2016-03-02 Impact factor: 2.714
Authors: Cassandra M Wilkinson; Jennifer I Burrell; Jonathan W P Kuziek; Sibi Thirunavukkarasu; Brian H Buck; Kyle E Mathewson Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2020-10-28 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Zafer Keser; Samuel C Buchl; Nathan A Seven; Matej Markota; Heather M Clark; David T Jones; Giuseppe Lanzino; Robert D Brown; Gregory A Worrell; Brian N Lundstrom Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 4.003