Resuscitation · 2024
Good outcome prediction after out-of-hospital cardiac arrest: A prospective multicenter observational study in Korea (the KORHN-PRO registry).
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bang Hyo Jin, Youn Chun Song, Sandroni Claudio, Park Kyu Nam, Lee Byung Kook, Oh Sang Hoon, Cho In Soo, Choi Seung Pill, Korean Hypothermia Network Investigators
Аннотация
AIM: To assess the ability of clinical examination, biomarkers, electrophysiology and brain imaging, individually or in combination to predict good neurological outcomes at 6 months after CA.
METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the Korean Hypothermia Network Prospective Registry 1.0, which included adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients (≥18 years). Good outcome predictors were defined as both pupillary light reflex (PLR) and corneal reflex (CR) at admission, Glasgow Coma Scale Motor score (GCS-M) >3 at admission, neuron-specific enolase (NSE) <17 µg/L at 24-72 h, a median nerve somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) N20/P25 amplitude >4 µV, continuous background without discharges on electroencephalogram (EEG), and absence of anoxic injury on brain CT and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI).
RESULTS: A total of 1327 subjects were included in the final analysis, and their median age was 59 years; among them, 412 subjects had a good neurological outcome at 6 months. GCS-M >3 at admission had the highest specificity of 96.7% (95% CI 95.3-97.8), and normal brain DWI had the highest sensitivity of 96.3% (95% CI 92.9-98.4). When the two predictors were combined, the sensitivities tended to decrease (ranging from 2.7-81.1%), and the specificities tended to increase, ranging from81.3-100%. Through the explorative variation of the 2021 European Resuscitation Council (ERC) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) prognostication strategy algorithms, good outcomes were predicted, with a specificity of 83.2% and a sensitivity of 83.5% in patients by the algorithm.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical examination, biomarker, electrophysiology, and brain imaging predicted good outcomes at 6 months after CA. When the two predictors were combined, the specificity further improved. With the 2021 ERC/ESICM guidelines, the number of indeterminate patients and the uncertainty of prognostication can be reduced by using a good outcome prediction algorithm.
METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the Korean Hypothermia Network Prospective Registry 1.0, which included adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients (≥18 years). Good outcome predictors were defined as both pupillary light reflex (PLR) and corneal reflex (CR) at admission, Glasgow Coma Scale Motor score (GCS-M) >3 at admission, neuron-specific enolase (NSE) <17 µg/L at 24-72 h, a median nerve somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) N20/P25 amplitude >4 µV, continuous background without discharges on electroencephalogram (EEG), and absence of anoxic injury on brain CT and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI).
RESULTS: A total of 1327 subjects were included in the final analysis, and their median age was 59 years; among them, 412 subjects had a good neurological outcome at 6 months. GCS-M >3 at admission had the highest specificity of 96.7% (95% CI 95.3-97.8), and normal brain DWI had the highest sensitivity of 96.3% (95% CI 92.9-98.4). When the two predictors were combined, the sensitivities tended to decrease (ranging from 2.7-81.1%), and the specificities tended to increase, ranging from81.3-100%. Through the explorative variation of the 2021 European Resuscitation Council (ERC) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) prognostication strategy algorithms, good outcomes were predicted, with a specificity of 83.2% and a sensitivity of 83.5% in patients by the algorithm.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical examination, biomarker, electrophysiology, and brain imaging predicted good outcomes at 6 months after CA. When the two predictors were combined, the specificity further improved. With the 2021 ERC/ESICM guidelines, the number of indeterminate patients and the uncertainty of prognostication can be reduced by using a good outcome prediction algorithm.