Arendina W van der Kooi1, Irene J Zaal2, Francina A Klijn3, Huiberdina L Koek4, Ronald C Meijer5, Frans S Leijten6, Arjen J Slooter2. 1. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Electronic address: a.w.vanderkooi@umcutrecht.nl. 2. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 3. Department of Psychiatry, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 4. Department of Geriatrics, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 5. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. 6. Department of Neurology and Neurosurgery, Brain Center Rudolf Magnus, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite its frequency and impact, delirium is poorly recognized in postoperative and critically ill patients. EEG is highly sensitive to delirium but, as currently used, it is not diagnostic. To develop an EEG-based tool for delirium detection with a limited number of electrodes, we determined the optimal electrode derivation and EEG characteristic to discriminate delirium from nondelirium. METHODS: Standard EEGs were recorded in 28 patients with delirium and 28 age- and sex-matched patients who had undergone cardiothoracic surgery and were not delirious, as classified by experts using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, criteria. The first minute of artifact-free EEG data with eyes closed as well as with eyes open was selected. For each derivation, six EEG parameters were evaluated. Using Mann-Whitney U tests, all combinations of derivations and parameters were compared between patients with delirium and those without. Corresponding P values, corrected for multiple testing, were ranked. RESULTS: The largest difference between patients with and without delirium and highest area under the receiver operating curve (0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.00) was found during the eyes-closed periods of the EEG, using electrode derivation F8-Pz (frontal-parietal) and relative δ power (median [interquartile range (IQR)] for delirium, 0.59 [IQR, 0.47-0.71] and for nondelirium, 0.20 [IQR, 0.17-0.26]; P = .0000000000018). With a cutoff value of 0.37, it resulted in a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 100%-100%) and specificity of 96% (95% CI, 88%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: In a homogenous population of nonsedated patients who had undergone cardiothoracic surgery, we observed that relative δ power from an eyes-closed EEG recording with only two electrodes in a frontal-parietal derivation can distinguish among patients who have delirium and those who do not.
BACKGROUND: Despite its frequency and impact, delirium is poorly recognized in postoperative and critically illpatients. EEG is highly sensitive to delirium but, as currently used, it is not diagnostic. To develop an EEG-based tool for delirium detection with a limited number of electrodes, we determined the optimal electrode derivation and EEG characteristic to discriminate delirium from nondelirium. METHODS: Standard EEGs were recorded in 28 patients with delirium and 28 age- and sex-matched patients who had undergone cardiothoracic surgery and were not delirious, as classified by experts using Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, criteria. The first minute of artifact-free EEG data with eyes closed as well as with eyes open was selected. For each derivation, six EEG parameters were evaluated. Using Mann-Whitney U tests, all combinations of derivations and parameters were compared between patients with delirium and those without. Corresponding P values, corrected for multiple testing, were ranked. RESULTS: The largest difference between patients with and without delirium and highest area under the receiver operating curve (0.99; 95% CI, 0.97-1.00) was found during the eyes-closed periods of the EEG, using electrode derivation F8-Pz (frontal-parietal) and relative δ power (median [interquartile range (IQR)] for delirium, 0.59 [IQR, 0.47-0.71] and for nondelirium, 0.20 [IQR, 0.17-0.26]; P = .0000000000018). With a cutoff value of 0.37, it resulted in a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI, 100%-100%) and specificity of 96% (95% CI, 88%-100%). CONCLUSIONS: In a homogenous population of nonsedated patients who had undergone cardiothoracic surgery, we observed that relative δ power from an eyes-closed EEG recording with only two electrodes in a frontal-parietal derivation can distinguish among patients who have delirium and those who do not.
Authors: Pratik P Pandharipande; E Wesley Ely; Rakesh C Arora; Michele C Balas; Malaz A Boustani; Gabriel Heras La Calle; Colm Cunningham; John W Devlin; Julius Elefante; Jin H Han; Alasdair M MacLullich; José R Maldonado; Alessandro Morandi; Dale M Needham; Valerie J Page; Louise Rose; Jorge I F Salluh; Tarek Sharshar; Yahya Shehabi; Yoanna Skrobik; Arjen J C Slooter; Heidi A B Smith Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2017-06-13 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Gen Shinozaki; Nicholas L Bormann; Aubrey C Chan; Kasra Zarei; Nicholas A Sparr; Mason J Klisares; Sydney S Jellison; Jonathan T Heinzman; Elijah B Dahlstrom; Gabrielle N Duncan; Lindsey N Gaul; Robert J Wanzek; Ellyn M Cramer; Charlotte G Wimmel; Sayeh Sabbagh; Kumi Yuki; Michelle T Weckmann; Thoru Yamada; Matthew D Karam; Nicolas O Noiseux; Eri Shinozaki; Hyunkeun R Cho; Sangil Lee; John W Cromwell Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2019-09-03 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Mouhsin M Shafi; Emiliano Santarnecchi; Tamara G Fong; Richard N Jones; Edward R Marcantonio; Alvaro Pascual-Leone; Sharon K Inouye Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Meike van Sleuwen; Haoqi Sun; Christine Eckhardt; Anudeepthi Neelagiri; Ryan A Tesh; Mike Westmeijer; Luis Paixao; Subapriya Rajan; Parimala Velpula Krishnamurthy; Pooja Sikka; Michael J Leone; Ezhil Panneerselvam; Syed A Quadri; Oluwaseun Akeju; Eyal Y Kimchi; M Brandon Westover Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2022-01-01 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Jo Ellen Wilson; Matthew F Mart; Colm Cunningham; Yahya Shehabi; Timothy D Girard; Alasdair M J MacLullich; Arjen J C Slooter; E Wesley Ely Journal: Nat Rev Dis Primers Date: 2020-11-12 Impact factor: 65.038
Authors: T S Wildes; A C Winter; H R Maybrier; A M Mickle; E J Lenze; S Stark; N Lin; S K Inouye; E M Schmitt; S L McKinnon; M R Muench; M R Murphy; R T Upadhyayula; B A Fritz; K E Escallier; G P Apakama; D A Emmert; T J Graetz; T W Stevens; B J Palanca; R Hueneke; S Melby; B Torres; J M Leung; E Jacobsohn; M S Avidan Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2016-06-15 Impact factor: 2.692