Wolfgang Muhlhofer1, Jerzy P Szaflarski2. 1. Department of Neurology and UAB Epilepsy Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA. wmuhlhofer@uabmc.edu. 2. Department of Neurology and UAB Epilepsy Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper aims to review and summarize the key contributions of EEG to prognostication after cardiac arrest (CA). RECENT FINDINGS: While there are more EEG patterns predicting poor than good outcome, even EEG patterns previously considered to be "very malignant" may result in survival with a meaningful neurological outcome depending on their underlying etiology as well as the continuity and reactivity of the EEG background. Regardless of the potentially confounding factors, EEG patterns are highly specific with a relatively low false-positive rate. The development of more complex and comprehensive approaches to quantitative EEG analysis could help improve the prognostic value of EEG, but this approach has its own limitations. Seizures and status epilepticus in the setting of CA predict poor outcomes, but it is not clear whether treating them prevents additional brain damage and results in improved outcome. Either continuous EEG or frequent intermittent EEGs should be obtained within the first 12-24 h of return of spontaneous circulation in order to capture highly dynamic and prognostic patterns. Even though EEG has high predictive value for outcomes after cardiac arrest, it should not be the only prognostic tool. Rather, to improve prognostication, EEG should be used in combination with the neurological examination and other ancillary tests.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This paper aims to review and summarize the key contributions of EEG to prognostication after cardiac arrest (CA). RECENT FINDINGS: While there are more EEG patterns predicting poor than good outcome, even EEG patterns previously considered to be "very malignant" may result in survival with a meaningful neurological outcome depending on their underlying etiology as well as the continuity and reactivity of the EEG background. Regardless of the potentially confounding factors, EEG patterns are highly specific with a relatively low false-positive rate. The development of more complex and comprehensive approaches to quantitative EEG analysis could help improve the prognostic value of EEG, but this approach has its own limitations. Seizures and status epilepticus in the setting of CA predict poor outcomes, but it is not clear whether treating them prevents additional brain damage and results in improved outcome. Either continuous EEG or frequent intermittent EEGs should be obtained within the first 12-24 h of return of spontaneous circulation in order to capture highly dynamic and prognostic patterns. Even though EEG has high predictive value for outcomes after cardiac arrest, it should not be the only prognostic tool. Rather, to improve prognostication, EEG should be used in combination with the neurological examination and other ancillary tests.
Authors: Marion Leary; David A Fried; David F Gaieski; Raina M Merchant; Barry D Fuchs; Daniel M Kolansky; Dana P Edelson; Benjamin S Abella Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2010-07-02 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Robert W Neumar; Jerry P Nolan; Christophe Adrie; Mayuki Aibiki; Robert A Berg; Bernd W Böttiger; Clifton Callaway; Robert S B Clark; Romergryko G Geocadin; Edward C Jauch; Karl B Kern; Ivan Laurent; W T Longstreth; Raina M Merchant; Peter Morley; Laurie J Morrison; Vinay Nadkarni; Mary Ann Peberdy; Emanuel P Rivers; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; Frank W Sellke; Christian Spaulding; Kjetil Sunde; Terry Vanden Hoek Journal: Circulation Date: 2008-10-23 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mouhsin M Shafi; M Brandon Westover; Andrew J Cole; Ronan D Kilbride; Daniel B Hoch; Sydney S Cash Journal: Neurology Date: 2012-10-10 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Adithya Sivaraju; Emily J Gilmore; Charles R Wira; Anna Stevens; Nishi Rampal; Jeremy J Moeller; David M Greer; Lawrence J Hirsch; Nicolas Gaspard Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-05-05 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: M M Stecker; A T Cheung; A Pochettino; G P Kent; T Patterson; S J Weiss; J E Bavaria Journal: Ann Thorac Surg Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 4.330
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: A O Rossetti; G Logroscino; L Liaudet; C Ruffieux; V Ribordy; M D Schaller; P A Despland; M Oddo Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-07-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jakob I Doerrfuss; Alexander B Kowski; Martin Holtkamp; Moritz Thinius; Christoph Leithner; Christian Storm Journal: J Neurol Date: 2021-04-19 Impact factor: 4.849
Authors: Youn-Jung Kim; Min-Jee Kim; Yong Hwan Kim; Chun Song Youn; In Soo Cho; Su Jin Kim; Jung Hee Wee; Yoo Seok Park; Joo Suk Oh; Dong Hoon Lee; Won Young Kim Journal: Crit Care Date: 2021-11-17 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Stanley D T Pham; Hanneke M Keijzer; Barry J Ruijter; Antje A Seeber; Erik Scholten; Gea Drost; Walter M van den Bergh; Francois H M Kornips; Norbert A Foudraine; Albertus Beishuizen; Michiel J Blans; Jeannette Hofmeijer; Michel J A M van Putten; Marleen C Tjepkema-Cloostermans Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2022-03-02 Impact factor: 3.532