Jennifer Egbebike1, Qi Shen1, Kevin Doyle1, Caroline A Der-Nigoghossian2, Lucy Panicker2, Ian Jerome Gonzales2, Lauren Grobois1, Jerina C Carmona1, Athina Vrosgou1, Arshneil Kaur2, Amelia Boehme3, Angela Velazquez1, Benjamin Rohaut4, David Roh5, Sachin Agarwal5, Soojin Park5, E Sander Connolly6, Jan Claassen7. 1. Department of Neurology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 2. New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Epidemiology, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, New York, NY, USA. 4. Department of Neurology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; Department of Neurosurgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 5. Department of Neurology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 6. Department of Neurosurgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. 7. Department of Neurology, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, NY, USA; New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: jc1439@columbia.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recovery trajectories of clinically unresponsive patients with acute brain injury are largely uncertain. Brain activation in the absence of a behavioural response to spoken motor commands can be detected by EEG, also known as cognitive-motor dissociation. We aimed to explore the role of cognitive-motor dissociation in predicting time to recovery in patients with acute brain injury. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we prospectively studied two independent cohorts of clinically unresponsive patients (aged ≥18 years) with acute brain injury. Machine learning was applied to EEG recordings to diagnose cognitive-motor dissociation by detecting brain activation in response to verbal commands. Survival statistics and shift analyses were applied to the data to identify an association between cognitive-motor dissociation and time to and magnitude of recovery. The prediction accuracy of the model that was built using the derivation cohort was assessed using the validation cohort. Functional outcomes of all patients were assessed with the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) at hospital discharge and at 3, 6, and 12 months after injury. Patients who underwent withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies were censored, and death was treated as a competing risk. FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2014, and Sept 30, 2021, we screened 598 patients with acute brain injury and included 193 (32%) patients, of whom 100 were in the derivation cohort and 93 were in the validation cohort. At 12 months, 28 (15%) of 193 unresponsive patients had a GOS-E score of 4 or above. Cognitive-motor dissociation was seen in 27 (14%) patients and was an independent predictor of shorter time to good recovery (hazard ratio 5·6 [95% CI 2·5-12·5]), as was underlying traumatic brain injury or subdural haematoma (4·4 [1·4-14·0]), a Glasgow Coma Scale score on admission of greater than or equal to 8 (2·2 [1·0-4·7]), and younger age (1·0 [1·0-1·1]). Among patients discharged home or to a rehabilitation setting, those diagnosed with cognitive-motor dissociation consistently had higher scores on GOS-E indicating better functional recovery compared with those without cognitive-motor dissociation, which was seen as early as 3 months after the injury (odds ratio 4·5 [95% CI 2·0-33·6]). INTERPRETATION: Recovery trajectories of clinically unresponsive patients diagnosed with cognitive-motor dissociation early after brain injury are distinctly different from those without cognitive-motor dissociation. A diagnosis of cognitive-motor dissociation could inform the counselling of families of clinically unresponsive patients, and it could help clinicians to identify patients who will benefit from rehabilitation. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.
BACKGROUND: Recovery trajectories of clinically unresponsive patients with acute brain injury are largely uncertain. Brain activation in the absence of a behavioural response to spoken motor commands can be detected by EEG, also known as cognitive-motor dissociation. We aimed to explore the role of cognitive-motor dissociation in predicting time to recovery in patients with acute brain injury. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we prospectively studied two independent cohorts of clinically unresponsive patients (aged ≥18 years) with acute brain injury. Machine learning was applied to EEG recordings to diagnose cognitive-motor dissociation by detecting brain activation in response to verbal commands. Survival statistics and shift analyses were applied to the data to identify an association between cognitive-motor dissociation and time to and magnitude of recovery. The prediction accuracy of the model that was built using the derivation cohort was assessed using the validation cohort. Functional outcomes of all patients were assessed with the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) at hospital discharge and at 3, 6, and 12 months after injury. Patients who underwent withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies were censored, and death was treated as a competing risk. FINDINGS: Between July 1, 2014, and Sept 30, 2021, we screened 598 patients with acute brain injury and included 193 (32%) patients, of whom 100 were in the derivation cohort and 93 were in the validation cohort. At 12 months, 28 (15%) of 193 unresponsive patients had a GOS-E score of 4 or above. Cognitive-motor dissociation was seen in 27 (14%) patients and was an independent predictor of shorter time to good recovery (hazard ratio 5·6 [95% CI 2·5-12·5]), as was underlying traumatic brain injury or subdural haematoma (4·4 [1·4-14·0]), a Glasgow Coma Scale score on admission of greater than or equal to 8 (2·2 [1·0-4·7]), and younger age (1·0 [1·0-1·1]). Among patients discharged home or to a rehabilitation setting, those diagnosed with cognitive-motor dissociation consistently had higher scores on GOS-E indicating better functional recovery compared with those without cognitive-motor dissociation, which was seen as early as 3 months after the injury (odds ratio 4·5 [95% CI 2·0-33·6]). INTERPRETATION: Recovery trajectories of clinically unresponsive patients diagnosed with cognitive-motor dissociation early after brain injury are distinctly different from those without cognitive-motor dissociation. A diagnosis of cognitive-motor dissociation could inform the counselling of families of clinically unresponsive patients, and it could help clinicians to identify patients who will benefit from rehabilitation. FUNDING: US National Institutes of Health.
Authors: Daniel Kondziella; Christian K Friberg; Vibe G Frokjaer; Martin Fabricius; Kirsten Møller Journal: J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry Date: 2015-07-02 Impact factor: 10.154
Authors: Jan Claassen; Kevin Doyle; Adu Matory; Caroline Couch; Kelly M Burger; Angela Velazquez; Joshua U Okonkwo; Jean-Rémi King; Soojin Park; Sachin Agarwal; David Roh; Murad Megjhani; Andrey Eliseyev; E Sander Connolly; Benjamin Rohaut Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kennedy R Lees; Justin A Zivin; Tim Ashwood; Antonio Davalos; Stephen M Davis; Hans-Christoph Diener; James Grotta; Patrick Lyden; Ashfaq Shuaib; Hans-Göran Hårdemark; Warren W Wasiewski Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-02-09 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: George Howard; Jennifer L Waller; Jenifer H Voeks; Virginia J Howard; Edward C Jauch; Kennedy R Lees; Fenwick T Nichols; Volker W Rahlfs; David C Hess Journal: Stroke Date: 2012-02-16 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Flora M Hammond; Sheryl Katta-Charles; Mary Beth Russell; Ross D Zafonte; Jan Claassen; Amy K Wagner; Louis Puybasset; Satoshi Egawa; Steven Laureys; Michael Diringer; Robert D Stevens Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2021-07-08 Impact factor: 3.532
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
Authors: Ayham Alkhachroum; Brian Appavu; Benjamin Rohaut; Jan Claassen; Satoshi Egawa; Brandon Foreman; Nicolas Gaspard; Emily J Gilmore; Lawrence J Hirsch; Pedro Kurtz; Virginie Lambrecq; Julie Kromm; Paul Vespa; Sahar F Zafar Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2022-08-23 Impact factor: 41.787
Authors: Louis A Gomez; Qi Shen; Kevin Doyle; Athina Vrosgou; Angela Velazquez; Murad Megjhani; Shivani Ghoshal; David Roh; Sachin Agarwal; Soojin Park; Jan Claassen; Samantha Kleinberg Journal: Neurocrit Care Date: 2022-09-15 Impact factor: 3.532