Jonathan Elmer1,2, Jon C Rittenberger1, John Faro3, Bradley J Molyneaux2,4, Alexandra Popescu4, Clifton W Callaway1, Maria Baldwin5. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 2. Department of Critical Care Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 3. Department of Neuroscience, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 4. Department of Neurology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA. 5. Department of Neurology, Pittsburgh VA Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that there are readily classifiable electroencephalographic (EEG) phenotypes of early postanoxic multifocal myoclonus (PAMM) that develop after cardiac arrest. METHODS: We studied a cohort of consecutive comatose patients treated after cardiac arrest from January 2012 to February 2015. For patients with clinically evident myoclonus before awakening, 2 expert physicians reviewed and classified all EEG recordings. Major categories included: Pattern 1, suppression-burst background with high-amplitude polyspikes in lockstep with myoclonic jerks; and Pattern 2, continuous background with narrow, vertex spike-wave discharges in lockstep with myoclonic jerks. Other patterns were subcortical myoclonus and unclassifiable. We compared population characteristics and outcomes across these EEG subtypes. RESULTS: Overall, 401 patients were included, of whom 69 (16%) had early myoclonus. Among these patients, Pattern 1 was the most common, occurring in 48 patients (74%), whereas Pattern 2 occurred in 8 patients (12%). The remaining patients had subcortical myoclonus (n = 2, 3%) or other patterns (n = 7, 11%). No patients with Pattern 1, subcortical myoclonus, or other patterns survived with favorable outcome. By contrast, 4 of 8 patients (50%) with Pattern 2 on EEG survived, and 4 of 4 (100%) survivors had favorable outcomes despite remaining comatose for 1 to 2 weeks postarrest. INTERPRETATION: Early PAMM is common after cardiac arrest. We describe 2 distinct patterns with distinct prognostic significances. For patients with Pattern 1 EEGs, it may be appropriate to abandon our current clinical standard of aggressive therapy with conventional antiepileptic therapy in favor of early limitation of care or novel neuroprotective strategies. Ann Neurol 2016;80:175-184.
OBJECTIVE: We tested the hypothesis that there are readily classifiable electroencephalographic (EEG) phenotypes of early postanoxic multifocal myoclonus (PAMM) that develop after cardiac arrest. METHODS: We studied a cohort of consecutive comatosepatients treated after cardiac arrest from January 2012 to February 2015. For patients with clinically evident myoclonus before awakening, 2 expert physicians reviewed and classified all EEG recordings. Major categories included: Pattern 1, suppression-burst background with high-amplitude polyspikes in lockstep with myoclonic jerks; and Pattern 2, continuous background with narrow, vertex spike-wave discharges in lockstep with myoclonic jerks. Other patterns were subcortical myoclonus and unclassifiable. We compared population characteristics and outcomes across these EEG subtypes. RESULTS: Overall, 401 patients were included, of whom 69 (16%) had early myoclonus. Among these patients, Pattern 1 was the most common, occurring in 48 patients (74%), whereas Pattern 2 occurred in 8 patients (12%). The remaining patients had subcortical myoclonus (n = 2, 3%) or other patterns (n = 7, 11%). No patients with Pattern 1, subcortical myoclonus, or other patterns survived with favorable outcome. By contrast, 4 of 8 patients (50%) with Pattern 2 on EEG survived, and 4 of 4 (100%) survivors had favorable outcomes despite remaining comatose for 1 to 2 weeks postarrest. INTERPRETATION: Early PAMM is common after cardiac arrest. We describe 2 distinct patterns with distinct prognostic significances. For patients with Pattern 1 EEGs, it may be appropriate to abandon our current clinical standard of aggressive therapy with conventional antiepileptic therapy in favor of early limitation of care or novel neuroprotective strategies. Ann Neurol 2016;80:175-184.
Authors: Shinung Ching; Patrick L Purdon; Sujith Vijayan; Nancy J Kopell; Emery N Brown Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2012-02-07 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Clifton W Callaway; Michael W Donnino; Ericka L Fink; Romergryko G Geocadin; Eyal Golan; Karl B Kern; Marion Leary; William J Meurer; Mary Ann Peberdy; Trevonne M Thompson; Janice L Zimmerman Journal: Circulation Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Jason M Lucas; Michael N Cocchi; Justin Salciccioli; Jessica A Stanbridge; Romergryko G Geocadin; Susan T Herman; Michael W Donnino Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2011-10-01 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Jeannette Hofmeijer; Marleen C Tjepkema-Cloostermans; Michel J A M van Putten Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2013-10-26 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Jon C Rittenberger; Francis X Guyette; Samuel A Tisherman; Michael A DeVita; Rene J Alvarez; Clifton W Callaway Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2008-11 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Alexis Steinberg; Jon C Rittenberger; Maria Baldwin; John Faro; Alexandra Urban; Naoir Zaher; Clifton W Callaway; Jonathan Elmer Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Pawan Solanki; Patrick J Coppler; Jan Terje Kvaløy; Maria A Baldwin; Clifton W Callaway; Jonathan Elmer Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2019-07-17 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Jon C Rittenberger; Alexandra Weissman; Maria Baldwin; Kathryn Flickinger; Melissa J Repine; Francis X Guyette; Ankur A Doshi; Cameron Dezfulian; Clifton W Callaway; Jonathan Elmer Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2018-12-31 Impact factor: 5.262
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