Quantitative analysis of EEG reactivity for neurological prognostication after cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE

To test whether 1) quantitative analysis of EEG reactivity (EEG-R) using machine learning (ML) is superior to visual analysis, and 2) combining quantitative analyses of EEG-R and EEG background pattern increases prognostic value for prediction of poor outcome after cardiac arrest (CA).

METHODS

Several types of ML models were trained with twelve quantitative features derived from EEG-R and EEG background data of 134 adult CA patients. Poor outcome was a Cerebral Performance Category score of 3-5 within 6 months.

RESULTS

The Random Forest (RF) trained on EEG-R showed the highest AUC of 83% (95-CI 80-86) of tested ML classifiers, predicting poor outcome with 46% sensitivity (95%-CI 40-51) and 89% specificity (95%-CI 86-92). Visual analysis of EEG-R had 80% sensitivity and 65% specificity. The RF was also the best classifier for EEG background (AUC 85%, 95%-CI 83-88) at 24 h after CA, with 62% sensitivity (95%-CI 57-67) and 84% specificity (95%-CI 79-88). Combining EEG-R and EEG background RF classifiers reduced the number of false positives.

CONCLUSIONS

Quantitative EEG-R using ML predicts poor outcome with higher specificity, but lower sensitivity compared to visual analysis of EEG-R, and is of some additional value to ML on EEG background data.

SIGNIFICANCE: Quantitative EEG-R using ML is a promising alternative to visual analysis and of some added value to ML on EEG background data.