ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2015
Electrophysiological Monitoring of Brain Injury and Recovery after Cardiac Arrest.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of artificial intelligence in predicting neurological outcomes in postcardiac resuscitation.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2024Review
- Somatosensory Evoked Potentials and Neuroprognostication After Cardiac Arrest.Neurocritical care · 2020Review
- Pathophysiology and the Monitoring Methods for Cardiac Arrest Associated Brain Injury.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Reliable prognostic methods for cerebral functional outcome of post cardiac-arrest (CA) patients are necessary, especially since therapeutic hypothermia (TH) as a standard treatment. Traditional neurophysiological prognostic indicators, such as clinical examination and chemical biomarkers, may result in indecisive outcome predictions and do not directly reflect neuronal activity, though they have remained the mainstay of clinical prognosis. The most recent advances in electrophysiological methods--electroencephalography (EEG) pattern, evoked potential (EP) and cellular electrophysiological measurement--were developed to complement these deficiencies, and will be examined in this review article. EEG pattern (reactivity and continuity) provides real-time and accurate information for early-stage (particularly in the first 24 h) hypoxic-ischemic (HI) brain injury patients with high sensitivity. However, the signal is easily affected by external stimuli, thus the measurements of EP should be combined with EEG background to validate the predicted neurologic functional result. Cellular electrophysiology, such as multi-unit activity (MUA) and local field potentials (LFP), has strong potential for improving prognostication and therapy by offering additional neurophysiologic information to understand the underlying mechanisms of therapeutic methods. Electrophysiology provides reliable and precise prognostication on both global and cellular levels secondary to cerebral injury in cardiac arrest patients treated with TH.
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.