Resuscitation · 2019
Distinct predictive values of current neuroprognostic guidelines in post-cardiac arrest patients.
СтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Zhou Sonya E, Maciel Carolina B, Ormseth Cora H, Beekman Rachel, Gilmore Emily J, Greer David M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To assess the performance of neuroprognostic guidelines proposed by the American Academy of Neurology (AAN), European Resuscitation Council/European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ERC/ESICM), and American Heart Association (AHA) in predicting outcomes of patients who remain unconscious after cardiac arrest.
METHODS: We retrospectively identified a cohort of unconscious post-cardiac arrest patients at a single tertiary care centre from 2011 to 2017 and reviewed hospital records for clinical, radiographic, electrophysiologic, and biochemical findings. Outcomes at discharge and 6 months post-arrest were abstracted and dichotomized as good (Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scores of 1-2) versus poor (CPC 3-5). Outcomes predicted by current guidelines were compared to actual outcomes, with false positive rate (FPR) used as a measure of predictive value.
RESULTS: Of 226 patients, 36% survived to discharge, including 24 with good outcomes; 52% had withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies (WLST) during hospitalization. The AAN guideline yielded discharge and 6-month FPR of 8% and 15%, respectively. In contrast, the ERC/ESICM had a FPR of 0% at both discharge and 6 months. The AHA predictors had variable specificities, with diffuse hypoxic-ischaemic injury on MRI performing especially poorly (FPR 12%) at both discharge and 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Though each guideline had components that performed well, only the ERC/ESICM guideline yielded a 0% FPR. Amongst the AAN and AHA guidelines, false positives emerged more readily at 6 months, reflective of continuing recovery after discharge, even in a cohort inevitably biased by WLST. Further assessment of predictive modalities is needed to improve neuroprognostic accuracy.
METHODS: We retrospectively identified a cohort of unconscious post-cardiac arrest patients at a single tertiary care centre from 2011 to 2017 and reviewed hospital records for clinical, radiographic, electrophysiologic, and biochemical findings. Outcomes at discharge and 6 months post-arrest were abstracted and dichotomized as good (Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) scores of 1-2) versus poor (CPC 3-5). Outcomes predicted by current guidelines were compared to actual outcomes, with false positive rate (FPR) used as a measure of predictive value.
RESULTS: Of 226 patients, 36% survived to discharge, including 24 with good outcomes; 52% had withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies (WLST) during hospitalization. The AAN guideline yielded discharge and 6-month FPR of 8% and 15%, respectively. In contrast, the ERC/ESICM had a FPR of 0% at both discharge and 6 months. The AHA predictors had variable specificities, with diffuse hypoxic-ischaemic injury on MRI performing especially poorly (FPR 12%) at both discharge and 6 months.
CONCLUSIONS: Though each guideline had components that performed well, only the ERC/ESICM guideline yielded a 0% FPR. Amongst the AAN and AHA guidelines, false positives emerged more readily at 6 months, reflective of continuing recovery after discharge, even in a cohort inevitably biased by WLST. Further assessment of predictive modalities is needed to improve neuroprognostic accuracy.