These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Preliminary experience with point-of-care EEG in post-cardiac arrest patients.
    Author: Rittenberger JC, Weissman A, Baldwin M, Flickinger K, Repine MJ, Guyette FX, Doshi AA, Dezfulian C, Callaway CW, Elmer J, Pittsburgh Post Cardiac Arrest Service.
    Journal: Resuscitation; 2019 Feb; 135():98-102. PubMed ID: 30605711.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: Abnormal electroencephalography (EEG) patterns are common after resuscitation from cardiac arrest and have clinical and prognostic importance. Bedside continuous EEGs are not available in many institutions. We tested the feasibility of using a point-of-care system for EEG acquisition. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled a convenience sample of post-cardiac arrest patients between 9/2015-1/2017. Upon hospital arrival, a limited EEG montage was applied. We tested both continuous EEG (cEEG) and this point-of-care EEG (eEEG). A board-certified epileptologist and a board-certified neurointensivist jointly reviewed all EEGs. Cohen's kappa coefficient evaluated agreement between eEEG and cEEG and Fisher's exact test evaluated their associations with survival to hospital discharge and proximate cause of death. RESULTS: We studied 95 comatose post-cardiac arrest patients. Mean age was 59 (SD17) years. Most (61%) were male, few (N = 22; 23%) demonstrated shockable rhythms, and PCAC IV illness severity was present in 58 (61%). eEEG was interpretable in 57 (60%) subjects. The most common eEEG interpretations were: continuous (21%), generalized suppression (14%), burst-suppression (12%) and burst-suppression with identical bursts (10%). Seizures were detected in 2 eEEG subjects (2%). No patient with seizure or burst-suppression with identical bursts survived. cEEG demonstrated generalized suppression (31%), burst-suppression with identical bursts (27%), continuous (18%) and seizure (4%). The eEEG and cEEG demonstrated fair agreement (kappa = 0.27). Neither eEEG nor cEEG was associated with survival (p = 0.19; p = 0.11) or proximate cause of death (p = 0.14; p = 0.8) CONCLUSIONS: eEEG is feasible, although artifact often precludes interpretation. eEEG is fairly associated with cEEG and may facilitate post-cardiac arrest care.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]