Matthew B Bevers1, Benjamin M Scirica2, Kathleen Ryan Avery3, Galen V Henderson4, Alexander P Lin5, Jong W Lee6. 1. Divisions of Stroke, Cerebrovascular and Critical Care Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. mbevers@bwh.harvard.edu. 2. Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Department of Nursing, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Divisions of Stroke, Cerebrovascular and Critical Care Neurology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Division of Epilepsy and Seizure Disorders, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread adoption of targeted temperature management (TTM), coma after cardiac arrest remains a common problem with a high proportion of patients suffering substantial disability. Prognostication after cardiac arrest, particularly the identification of patients with likely good outcome, remains difficult. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 78 patients who underwent TTM after cardiac arrest and were evaluated with both electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We hypothesized that combining malignant versus non-malignant EEG classification with clinical exam and quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging would improve prognostic ability. RESULTS: Consistent with prior literature, presence of a malignant EEG pattern was 100% specific for poor outcome. We found that decreased whole brain ADC signal intensity was associated with poor outcome (853 ± 14 vs. 950 ± 17.5 mm2/s, p < 0.0001). Less than 15% total brain volume with ADC signal intensity < 650 mm2/s was predictive of good outcome with 100% sensitivity, 51% specificity and an area under the curve of 0.787. A model combining this ADC marker with non-malignant EEG and flexor-or-better motor response was 100% sensitive and 91.1% specific for good outcome following cardiac arrest and targeted temperature management. CONCLUSION: We conclude that in the absence of malignant EEG findings, combination of physical exam and MRI findings can be a useful to identify those patients who have potential for recovery. Variability in timing of imaging and findings in different modalities argue for the need for future prospective studies of multimodal outcome prediction after cardiac arrest.
BACKGROUND: Despite the widespread adoption of targeted temperature management (TTM), coma after cardiac arrest remains a common problem with a high proportion of patients suffering substantial disability. Prognostication after cardiac arrest, particularly the identification of patients with likely good outcome, remains difficult. METHODS: We performed a retrospective study of 78 patients who underwent TTM after cardiac arrest and were evaluated with both electroencephalography (EEG) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). We hypothesized that combining malignant versus non-malignant EEG classification with clinical exam and quantitative analysis of apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) and fluid-attenuated inversion recovery imaging would improve prognostic ability. RESULTS: Consistent with prior literature, presence of a malignant EEG pattern was 100% specific for poor outcome. We found that decreased whole brain ADC signal intensity was associated with poor outcome (853 ± 14 vs. 950 ± 17.5 mm2/s, p < 0.0001). Less than 15% total brain volume with ADC signal intensity < 650 mm2/s was predictive of good outcome with 100% sensitivity, 51% specificity and an area under the curve of 0.787. A model combining this ADC marker with non-malignant EEG and flexor-or-better motor response was 100% sensitive and 91.1% specific for good outcome following cardiac arrest and targeted temperature management. CONCLUSION: We conclude that in the absence of malignant EEG findings, combination of physical exam and MRI findings can be a useful to identify those patients who have potential for recovery. Variability in timing of imaging and findings in different modalities argue for the need for future prospective studies of multimodal outcome prediction after cardiac arrest.
Authors: Amy Z Crepeau; Alejandro A Rabinstein; Jennifer E Fugate; Jay Mandrekar; Eelco F Wijdicks; Roger D White; Jeffrey W Britton Journal: Neurology Date: 2013-01-02 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Michael Mlynash; Dennis M Campbell; Emily M Leproust; Nancy J Fischbein; Roland Bammer; Irina Eyngorn; Amie W Hsia; Michael Moseley; Christine A C Wijman Journal: Stroke Date: 2010-07-01 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Ruchira Jha; Thomas W K Battey; Ly Pham; Svetlana Lorenzano; Karen L Furie; Kevin N Sheth; W Taylor Kimberly Journal: Stroke Date: 2014-03-11 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Christine A C Wijman; Michael Mlynash; Anna Finley Caulfield; Amie W Hsia; Irina Eyngorn; Roland Bammer; Nancy Fischbein; Gregory W Albers; Michael Moseley Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 10.422
Authors: Ona Wu; A Gregory Sorensen; Thomas Benner; Aneesh B Singhal; Karen L Furie; David M Greer Journal: Radiology Date: 2009-05-06 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Samuel B Snider; David Fischer; Morgan E McKeown; Alexander Li Cohen; Frederic L W V J Schaper; Edilberto Amorim; Michael D Fox; Benjamin Scirica; Matthew B Bevers; Jong Woo Lee Journal: Neurology Date: 2022-01-11 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Alyssa E Smith; Alex P Ganninger; Ali Y Mian; Stuart H Friess; Rejean M Guerriero; Kristin P Guilliams Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2022-02-25 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Wei-Long Zheng; Edilberto Amorim; Jin Jing; Ona Wu; Mohammad Ghassemi; Jong Woo Lee; Adithya Sivaraju; Trudy Pang; Susan T Herman; Nicolas Gaspard; Barry J Ruijter; Marleen C Tjepkema-Cloostermans; Jeannette Hofmeijer; Michel J A M van Putten; M Brandon Westover Journal: IEEE Trans Biomed Eng Date: 2022-04-21 Impact factor: 4.756
Authors: Isabelle Beuchat; Adithya Sivaraju; Edilberto Amorim; Emily J Gilmore; Vincent Dunet; Andrea O Rossetti; M Brandon Westover; Liangge Hsu; Benjamin M Scirica; Danuzia Silva; Kathleen Tang; Jong Woo Lee Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-06-01 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Wei-Long Zheng; Edilberto Amorim; Jin Jing; Wendong Ge; Shenda Hong; Ona Wu; Mohammad Ghassemi; Jong Woo Lee; Adithya Sivaraju; Trudy Pang; Susan T Herman; Nicolas Gaspard; Barry J Ruijter; Jimeng Sun; Marleen C Tjepkema-Cloostermans; Jeannette Hofmeijer; Michel J A M van Putten; M Brandon Westover Journal: Resuscitation Date: 2021-10-24 Impact factor: 5.262
Authors: Peggy L Nguyen; Laith Alreshaid; Roy A Poblete; Geoffrey Konye; Jonathan Marehbian; Gene Sung Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 4.003