BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We investigated the inter-observer variability in interpretation of median nerve SSEPs with regard to neurological prognosis in survivors of cardiac arrest (CA). METHODS: Four experienced neurologists analyzed 163 median nerve SSEPs on the basis of a pre-defined classification of SSEPs into five patterns (A-E), with consideration of cortical potentials up to a latency of 150ms. Of these, 133 recordings were from CA survivors and 30 were from healthy volunteers. The experts were blinded to whether a SSEP finding was from a CA survivor or a healthy volunteer. They were also unaware of the neurological outcome for the resuscitated patients. Three categories were defined for decision making. These were "good neurological outcome" represented by patterns A-C, "poor neurological outcome" (patterns D and E), and "not evaluable". Experts' agreement was calculated using the kappa-coefficient. RESULTS: The mean correct prediction by the experts was 81.8% (range 76.3-86.6%) in resuscitated patients with good neurological outcome. In those with poor neurological outcome, however, correct prediction was achieved in only 63% (60.5-66%). All SSEPs from healthy volunteers were classified as "good neurological outcome". The kappa-coefficient (κ) for all decision-making classifications was 0.75; for patients with poor outcome it was 0.76 and for those with good outcome 0.88. The predictive value for poor neurological outcome of the SSEP pattern D achieved a specificity of 93.5% and that of E a specificity of 98.4%. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates good inter-observer agreement in the interpretation of median nerve SSEPs in CA survivors on the basis of a pre-defined SSEP evaluation set. The strongest correlation with poor outcome was found for pattern E, bilateral absence of the N20 peak.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We investigated the inter-observer variability in interpretation of median nerve SSEPs with regard to neurological prognosis in survivors of cardiac arrest (CA). METHODS: Four experienced neurologists analyzed 163 median nerve SSEPs on the basis of a pre-defined classification of SSEPs into five patterns (A-E), with consideration of cortical potentials up to a latency of 150ms. Of these, 133 recordings were from CA survivors and 30 were from healthy volunteers. The experts were blinded to whether a SSEP finding was from a CA survivor or a healthy volunteer. They were also unaware of the neurological outcome for the resuscitated patients. Three categories were defined for decision making. These were "good neurological outcome" represented by patterns A-C, "poor neurological outcome" (patterns D and E), and "not evaluable". Experts' agreement was calculated using the kappa-coefficient. RESULTS: The mean correct prediction by the experts was 81.8% (range 76.3-86.6%) in resuscitated patients with good neurological outcome. In those with poor neurological outcome, however, correct prediction was achieved in only 63% (60.5-66%). All SSEPs from healthy volunteers were classified as "good neurological outcome". The kappa-coefficient (κ) for all decision-making classifications was 0.75; for patients with poor outcome it was 0.76 and for those with good outcome 0.88. The predictive value for poor neurological outcome of the SSEP pattern D achieved a specificity of 93.5% and that of E a specificity of 98.4%. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates good inter-observer agreement in the interpretation of median nerve SSEPs in CA survivors on the basis of a pre-defined SSEP evaluation set. The strongest correlation with poor outcome was found for pattern E, bilateral absence of the N20 peak.
Authors: Claudio Sandroni; Sonia D'Arrigo; Sofia Cacciola; Cornelia W E Hoedemaekers; Marlijn J A Kamps; Mauro Oddo; Fabio S Taccone; Arianna Di Rocco; Frederick J A Meijer; Erik Westhall; Massimo Antonelli; Jasmeet Soar; Jerry P Nolan; Tobias Cronberg Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2020-09-11 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Jerry P Nolan; Claudio Sandroni; Bernd W Böttiger; Alain Cariou; Tobias Cronberg; Hans Friberg; Cornelia Genbrugge; Kirstie Haywood; Gisela Lilja; Véronique R M Moulaert; Nikolaos Nikolaou; Theresa Mariero Olasveengen; Markus B Skrifvars; Fabio Taccone; Jasmeet Soar Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2021-03-25 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Claudio Sandroni; Alain Cariou; Fabio Cavallaro; Tobias Cronberg; Hans Friberg; Cornelia Hoedemaekers; Janneke Horn; Jerry P Nolan; Andrea O Rossetti; Jasmeet Soar Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2014-11-15 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Barry J Ruijter; Marleen C Tjepkema-Cloostermans; Selma C Tromp; Walter M van den Bergh; Norbert A Foudraine; Francois H M Kornips; Gea Drost; Erik Scholten; Frank H Bosch; Albertus Beishuizen; Michel J A M van Putten; Jeannette Hofmeijer Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Andrea Victoria Arciniegas-Villanueva; Eva María Fernández-Diaz; Emilio Gonzalez-Garcìa; Javier Sancho-Pelluz; David Mansilla-Lozano; Tomás Segura Journal: Front Hum Neurosci Date: 2022-07-04 Impact factor: 3.473