ArticleJournal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry1992
Motor and somatosensory evoked potentials in coma: analysis and relation to clinical status and outcome.
Article in Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry, 1992. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 40 citations in OpenAlex.
- Are somatosensory evoked potentials the best predictor of outcome after severe brain injury? A systematic review.Intensive care medicine · 2005Pooled it
- A prospective study of outcome predictors after severe brain injury in children.Intensive care medicine · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Central sensory and motor conduction were studied in 23 comatose and three brain-dead patients. Motor evoked potentials (MEPs) to transcranial magnetic (magMEP) and electrical (elMEP) stimulation were recorded from the hypothenar muscle, and somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) were recorded after median nerve stimulation. Comparison of clinical with evoked potential (EP) findings revealed: 1) a painful stimulus applied to the skin of the arm lowered excitation threshold to cortical stimulation and was a prerequisite to obtain MEPs in 14 instances; 2) only in braindead patients were all EPs abolished simultaneously and bilaterally; 3) MEPs (p less than or equal to 0.05, chi 2-Test), but not necessarily SEPs (p greater than 0.1) were preserved in the arms that showed normal motor reaction during clinical examination; 4) no correlation was found between EP findings and the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS). The results of clinical and EP testing were examined in the light of the patient's outcome 10 months later: 1) fatal outcome was predicted by a GCS of three (38% of cases, p less than or equal to 0.05, Fisher's exact test), abolished brainstem- or papillary reflexes (38%, p less than or equal to 0.05), the combination of these clinical signs (54%, p less than or equal to 0.01), bilateral abolition of elMEPs (38%, p less than or equal to 0.05), magMEPs (38%, p less than or equal to 0.05), or SEPs (23%, p greater than 0.1), or a combination of clinical and EP data (85%, p less than or equal to 0.0005); 2) good outcome was predicted by a GCS of greater than or equal to 8 only in post-traumatic coma, and EPs did not help to predict fatal outcome of coma; 1) if this appears impossible on the basis of clinical data alone; 2) if a second indicator is needed to confirm a clinical impression; 3) SEPs may be first evaluated during the acute stage of coma treatment, because they can be recorded in the presence of anaesthetic or relaxant agents; 4) MEP may be studied if outcome prediction remains ambiguous, and if the clinical situation allows for discontinuation of these agents.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.