Jakob I Doerrfuss1, Alexander B Kowski2, Martin Holtkamp2, Moritz Thinius2, Christoph Leithner2, Christian Storm3. 1. Department of Neurology and Experimental Neurology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. jakob.doerrfuss@charite.de. 2. Department of Neurology and Experimental Neurology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 3. Department of Nephrology and Medical Intensive Care, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Electroencephalography (EEG) significantly contributes to the neuroprognostication after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Recent studies suggest that the prognostic value of EEG is highest for continuous recording within the first days after cardiac arrest. Early continuous EEG, however, is not available in all hospitals. In this observational study, we sought to evaluate the predictive value of a 'late' EEG recording 5-14 days after cardiac arrest without sedatives. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed EEG data in consecutive adult patients treated at the medical intensive care units (ICU) of the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin. Outcome was assessed as cerebral performance category (CPC) at discharge from ICU, with an unfavorable outcome being defined as CPC 4 and 5. RESULTS: In 187 patients, a 'late' EEG recording was performed. Of these patients, 127 were without continuous administration of sedative agents for at least 24 h before the EEG recording. In this patient group, a continuously suppressed background activity < 10 µV predicted an unfavorable outcome with a sensitivity of 31% (95% confidence interval (CI) 20-45) and a specificity of 99% (95% CI 91-100). In patients with suppressed background activity and generalized periodic discharges, sensitivity was 15% (95% CI 7-27) and specificity was 100% (95% CI 94-100). GPDs on unsuppressed background activity were associated with a sensitivity of 42% (95% CI 29-46) and a specificity of 92% (95% CI 82-97). CONCLUSIONS: A 'late' EEG performed 5 to 14 days after resuscitation from cardiac arrest can aide in prognosticating functional outcome. A suppressed EEG background activity in this time period indicates poor outcome.
BACKGROUND: Electroencephalography (EEG) significantly contributes to the neuroprognostication after resuscitation from cardiac arrest. Recent studies suggest that the prognostic value of EEG is highest for continuous recording within the first days after cardiac arrest. Early continuous EEG, however, is not available in all hospitals. In this observational study, we sought to evaluate the predictive value of a 'late' EEG recording 5-14 days after cardiac arrest without sedatives. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed EEG data in consecutive adult patients treated at the medical intensive care units (ICU) of the Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin. Outcome was assessed as cerebral performance category (CPC) at discharge from ICU, with an unfavorable outcome being defined as CPC 4 and 5. RESULTS: In 187 patients, a 'late' EEG recording was performed. Of these patients, 127 were without continuous administration of sedative agents for at least 24 h before the EEG recording. In this patient group, a continuously suppressed background activity < 10 µV predicted an unfavorable outcome with a sensitivity of 31% (95% confidence interval (CI) 20-45) and a specificity of 99% (95% CI 91-100). In patients with suppressed background activity and generalized periodic discharges, sensitivity was 15% (95% CI 7-27) and specificity was 100% (95% CI 94-100). GPDs on unsuppressed background activity were associated with a sensitivity of 42% (95% CI 29-46) and a specificity of 92% (95% CI 82-97). CONCLUSIONS: A 'late' EEG performed 5 to 14 days after resuscitation from cardiac arrest can aide in prognosticating functional outcome. A suppressed EEG background activity in this time period indicates poor outcome.
Entities:
Keywords:
EEG; Outcome; Predictive value of tests; Resuscitation; Targeted temperature management
Authors: Jerry P Nolan; Jasmeet Soar; Alain Cariou; Tobias Cronberg; Véronique R M Moulaert; Charles D Deakin; Bernd W Bottiger; Hans Friberg; Kjetil Sunde; Claudio Sandroni Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2015-12 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: Fabio Silvio Taccone; Ingrid Baar; Cathy De Deyne; Patrick Druwe; Benjamin Legros; Geert Meyfroidt; Michel Ossemann; Nicolas Gaspard Journal: Acta Neurol Belg Date: 2017-02-06 Impact factor: 2.396
Authors: M Spalletti; R Carrai; M Scarpino; C Cossu; A Ammannati; M Ciapetti; L Tadini Buoninsegni; A Peris; S Valente; A Grippo; A Amantini Journal: Clin Neurophysiol Date: 2016-04-21 Impact factor: 3.708
Authors: Jeannette Hofmeijer; Tim M J Beernink; Frank H Bosch; Albertus Beishuizen; Marleen C Tjepkema-Cloostermans; Michel J A M van Putten Journal: Neurology Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Erik Westhall; Andrea O Rossetti; Anne-Fleur van Rootselaar; Troels Wesenberg Kjaer; Janneke Horn; Susann Ullén; Hans Friberg; Niklas Nielsen; Ingmar Rosén; Anders Åneman; David Erlinge; Yvan Gasche; Christian Hassager; Jan Hovdenes; Jesper Kjaergaard; Michael Kuiper; Tommaso Pellis; Pascal Stammet; Michael Wanscher; Jørn Wetterslev; Matt P Wise; Tobias Cronberg Journal: Neurology Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Barry J Ruijter; Marleen C Tjepkema-Cloostermans; Selma C Tromp; Walter M van den Bergh; Norbert A Foudraine; Francois H M Kornips; Gea Drost; Erik Scholten; Frank H Bosch; Albertus Beishuizen; Michel J A M van Putten; Jeannette Hofmeijer Journal: Ann Neurol Date: 2019-06-24 Impact factor: 10.422