OBJECTIVE: Accurate behavioral assessments of consciousness carry tremendous significance in guiding management, but are extremely challenging in acutely brain-injured patients. We evaluated whether electroencephalography (EEG) and multimodality monitoring parameters may facilitate assessment of consciousness in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of 83 consecutively treated adults with subarachnoid hemorrhage. All patients were initially comatose and had invasive brain monitoring placed. Behavioral assessments were performed during daily interruption of sedation and categorized into 3 groups based on their best examination as (1) comatose, (2) arousable (eye opening or attending toward a stimulus), and (3) aware (command following). EEG features included spectral power and complexity measures. Comparisons were made using bootstrapping methods and partial least squares regression. RESULTS: We identified 389 artifact-free EEG clips following behavioral assessments. Increasing central gamma, posterior alpha, and diffuse theta-delta oscillations differentiated patients who were arousable from those in coma. Command following was characterized by a further increase in central gamma and posterior alpha, as well as an increase in alpha permutation entropy. These EEG features together with basic neurological examinations (eg, pupillary light reflex) contributed heavily to a linear model predicting behavioral state, whereas brain physiology measures (eg, brain oxygenation), structural injury, and clinical course added less. INTERPRETATION: EEG measures of behavioral states provide distinctive signatures that complement behavioral assessments of patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage shortly after the injury. Our data support the hypothesis that impaired connectivity of cortex with both central thalamus and basal forebrain underlies decreasing levels of consciousness. Ann Neurol 2016;80:541-553.
OBJECTIVE: Accurate behavioral assessments of consciousness carry tremendous significance in guiding management, but are extremely challenging in acutely brain-injured patients. We evaluated whether electroencephalography (EEG) and multimodality monitoring parameters may facilitate assessment of consciousness in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of 83 consecutively treated adults with subarachnoid hemorrhage. All patients were initially comatose and had invasive brain monitoring placed. Behavioral assessments were performed during daily interruption of sedation and categorized into 3 groups based on their best examination as (1) comatose, (2) arousable (eye opening or attending toward a stimulus), and (3) aware (command following). EEG features included spectral power and complexity measures. Comparisons were made using bootstrapping methods and partial least squares regression. RESULTS: We identified 389 artifact-free EEG clips following behavioral assessments. Increasing central gamma, posterior alpha, and diffuse theta-delta oscillations differentiated patients who were arousable from those in coma. Command following was characterized by a further increase in central gamma and posterior alpha, as well as an increase in alpha permutation entropy. These EEG features together with basic neurological examinations (eg, pupillary light reflex) contributed heavily to a linear model predicting behavioral state, whereas brain physiology measures (eg, brain oxygenation), structural injury, and clinical course added less. INTERPRETATION: EEG measures of behavioral states provide distinctive signatures that complement behavioral assessments of patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage shortly after the injury. Our data support the hypothesis that impaired connectivity of cortex with both central thalamus and basal forebrain underlies decreasing levels of consciousness. Ann Neurol 2016;80:541-553.
Authors: Damian Cruse; Srivas Chennu; Camille Chatelle; Tristan A Bekinschtein; Davinia Fernández-Espejo; John D Pickard; Steven Laureys; Adrian M Owen Journal: Lancet Date: 2011-11-09 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Aylin Cimenser; Patrick L Purdon; Eric T Pierce; John L Walsh; Andres F Salazar-Gomez; Priscilla G Harrell; Casie Tavares-Stoeckel; Kathleen Habeeb; Emery N Brown Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-05-09 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Charles B Mikell; Garrett P Banks; Hans-Peter Frey; Brett E Youngerman; Taylor B Nelp; Patrick J Karas; Andrew K Chan; Henning U Voss; E Sander Connolly; Jan Claassen Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-12-09 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: E Sander Connolly; Alejandro A Rabinstein; J Ricardo Carhuapoma; Colin P Derdeyn; Jacques Dion; Randall T Higashida; Brian L Hoh; Catherine J Kirkness; Andrew M Naidech; Christopher S Ogilvy; Aman B Patel; B Gregory Thompson; Paul Vespa Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-05-03 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Jan Claassen; David Albers; J Michael Schmidt; Gian Marco De Marchis; Deborah Pugin; Christina Maria Falo; Stephan A Mayer; Serge Cremers; Sachin Agarwal; Mitchell S V Elkind; E Sander Connolly; Vanja Dukic; George Hripcsak; Neeraj Badjatia Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2014-05-16 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Caroline Schnakers; Evan S Lutkenhoff; Branden J Bio; David L McArthur; Paul M Vespa; Martin M Monti Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2018-06-28 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: John C O'Donnell; Kevin D Browne; Todd J Kilbaugh; H Isaac Chen; John Whyte; D Kacy Cullen Journal: Neurosci Biobehav Rev Date: 2018-12-11 Impact factor: 8.989
Authors: Peter B Forgacs; Baxter B Allen; Xian Wu; Linda M Gerber; Srikanth Boddu; Malik Fakhar; Philip E Stieg; Nicholas D Schiff; Halinder S Mangat Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2021-10-20 Impact factor: 3.210
Authors: Fawaz Al-Mufti; Stephan A Mayer; Gurmeen Kaur; Daniel Bassily; Boyi Li; Matthew L Holstein; Jood Ani; Nicole E Matluck; Haris Kamal; Rolla Nuoman; Christian A Bowers; Faizan S Ali; Hussein Al-Shammari; Mohammad El-Ghanem; Chirag Gandhi; Krishna Amuluru Journal: Neuroradiol J Date: 2021-09-03
Authors: Jan Claassen; Yama Akbari; Sheila Alexander; Mary Kay Bader; Kathleen Bell; Thomas P Bleck; Melanie Boly; Jeremy Brown; Sherry H-Y Chou; Michael N Diringer; Brian L Edlow; Brandon Foreman; Joseph T Giacino; Olivia Gosseries; Theresa Green; David M Greer; Daniel F Hanley; Jed A Hartings; Raimund Helbok; J Claude Hemphill; H E Hinson; Karen Hirsch; Theresa Human; Michael L James; Nerissa Ko; Daniel Kondziella; Sarah Livesay; Lori K Madden; Shraddha Mainali; Stephan A Mayer; Victoria McCredie; Molly M McNett; Geert Meyfroidt; Martin M Monti; Susanne Muehlschlegel; Santosh Murthy; Paul Nyquist; DaiWai M Olson; J Javier Provencio; Eric Rosenthal; Gisele Sampaio Silva; Simone Sarasso; Nicholas D Schiff; Tarek Sharshar; Lori Shutter; Robert D Stevens; Paul Vespa; Walter Videtta; Amy Wagner; Wendy Ziai; John Whyte; Elizabeth Zink; Jose I Suarez Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 3.210