Does continuous EEG influence prognosis in patients after cardiac arrest?
Details
Serval ID
serval:BIB_EDE401C6FD4D
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Does continuous EEG influence prognosis in patients after cardiac arrest?
Journal
Resuscitation
ISSN
1873-1570 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0300-9572
Publication state
Published
Issued date
11/2018
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
132
Pages
29-32
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Electroencephalography (EEG) is a key modality for assessment of prognosis following cardiac arrest (CA); however, whether continuous EEG (cEEG) is superior to routine intermittent EEG (rEEG) remains debated. We examined the impact of cEEG (>18 h) vs. rEEG (<30 min) on outcome in comatose CA patients as part of multimodal prognostication.
We analysed a large prospective registry of comatose post-CA adults (n = 497; 2009-2018), stratified based on whether they received cEEG (n = 62) or rEEG (n = 435), including standardized reactivity testing at two time-points. The primary endpoint was the impact of cEEG vs. rEEG on Glasgow-Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Categories (CPC) at three months; we also assessed impact on time to death.
Main patients' baseline clinical characteristics and CPC scores were comparable between the EEG groups. By multivariable analysis age, non-shockable rhythm, presence of early myoclonus, absent EEG background reactivity, absent somato-sensory evoked potentials, and serum NSE were independently associated with poor neurological outcome (CPC 3-5), while the EEG approach had no impact on patient prognosis and time to death.
Our data suggest that cEEG does not confer any advantage over intermittent rEEG regarding outcome in patients with CA, and does not influence the time to death.
We analysed a large prospective registry of comatose post-CA adults (n = 497; 2009-2018), stratified based on whether they received cEEG (n = 62) or rEEG (n = 435), including standardized reactivity testing at two time-points. The primary endpoint was the impact of cEEG vs. rEEG on Glasgow-Pittsburgh Cerebral Performance Categories (CPC) at three months; we also assessed impact on time to death.
Main patients' baseline clinical characteristics and CPC scores were comparable between the EEG groups. By multivariable analysis age, non-shockable rhythm, presence of early myoclonus, absent EEG background reactivity, absent somato-sensory evoked potentials, and serum NSE were independently associated with poor neurological outcome (CPC 3-5), while the EEG approach had no impact on patient prognosis and time to death.
Our data suggest that cEEG does not confer any advantage over intermittent rEEG regarding outcome in patients with CA, and does not influence the time to death.
Keywords
Aged, Case-Control Studies, Coma/mortality, Coma/physiopathology, Electroencephalography/methods, Female, Heart Arrest/mortality, Heart Arrest/physiopathology, Humans, Hypothermia, Induced/methods, Male, Middle Aged, Predictive Value of Tests, Registries, Retrospective Studies, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome, Monitoring, Mortality, Outcome, Routine EEG
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
03/09/2018 13:09
Last modification date
18/06/2022 5:34