Publication:
EEG reactivity testing for prediction of good outcome in patients after cardiac arrest

dc.contributor.authorMarjolein M. Admiraalen_US
dc.contributor.authorJanneke Hornen_US
dc.contributor.authorJeannette Hofmeijeren_US
dc.contributor.authorCornelia W.E. Hoedemaekersen_US
dc.contributor.authorC. R. van Kaamen_US
dc.contributor.authorHanneke M. Keijzeren_US
dc.contributor.authorMichel J.A.M. van Puttenen_US
dc.contributor.authorMarcus J. Schultzen_US
dc.contributor.authorAnne Fleur van Rootselaaren_US
dc.contributor.otherUniversity of Twenteen_US
dc.date.accessioned2020-08-25T10:23:53Z
dc.date.available2020-08-25T10:23:53Z
dc.date.issued2020-08-11en_US
dc.description.abstract© 2020 American Academy of Neurology. OBJECTIVE: To determine the additional value of EEG reactivity (EEG-R) testing to EEG background pattern for prediction of good outcome in adult patients after cardiac arrest (CA). METHODS: In this post hoc analysis of a prospective cohort study, EEG-R was tested twice a day, using a strict protocol. Good outcome was defined as a Cerebral Performance Category score of 1-2 within 6 months. The additional value of EEG-R per EEG background pattern was evaluated using the diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). Prognostic value (sensitivity and specificity) of EEG-R was investigated in relation to time after CA, sedative medication, different stimuli, and repeated testing. RESULTS: Between 12 and 24 hours after CA, data of 108 patients were available. Patients with a continuous (n = 64) or discontinuous (n = 19) normal voltage background pattern with reactivity were 3 and 8 times more likely to have a good outcome than without reactivity (continuous: DOR, 3.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97-12.0; p = 0.06; discontinuous: DOR, 8.0; 95% CI, 1.0-63.97; p = 0.0499). EEG-R was not observed in other background patterns within 24 hours after CA. In 119 patients with a normal voltage EEG background pattern, continuous or discontinuous, any time after CA, prognostic value was highest in sedated patients (sensitivity 81.3%, specificity 59.5%), irrespective of time after CA. EEG-R induced by handclapping and sternal rubbing, especially when combined, had highest prognostic value. Repeated EEG-R testing increased prognostic value. CONCLUSION: EEG-R has additional value for prediction of good outcome in patients with discontinuous normal voltage EEG background pattern and possibly with continuous normal voltage. The best stimuli were clapping and sternal rubbing.en_US
dc.identifier.citationNeurology. Vol.95, No.6 (2020), e653-e661en_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1212/WNL.0000000000009991en_US
dc.identifier.issn1526632Xen_US
dc.identifier.other2-s2.0-85089358796en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/58029
dc.rightsMahidol Universityen_US
dc.rights.holderSCOPUSen_US
dc.source.urihttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85089358796&origin=inwarden_US
dc.subjectMedicineen_US
dc.titleEEG reactivity testing for prediction of good outcome in patients after cardiac arresten_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dspace.entity.typePublication
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85089358796&origin=inwarden_US

Files

Collections