Observational studyJAMA network open2020
Sensitivity of Continuous Electroencephalography to Detect Ictal Activity After Cardiac Arrest.
Observational study in JAMA network open, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07002294 (The Effect of SPecialty cAre on Recovery From Cardiac Arrest Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 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.
The Effect of SPecialty cAre on Recovery From Cardiac Arrest Trial (the SPARC Trial)
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.
- Early risk stratification for progression to death by neurological criteria following out-of-hospital cardiac arrest.Resuscitation · 2022Trial
- Role of Neurophysiologic Testing in Prognostication of Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy.Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2026Review
- Design and rationale of the SPARC trial: a phase II, single-system randomized controlled trial of immediate transfer to specialty post-arrest care.Resuscitation plus · 2026Article
- Article
- How much information is needed to predict outcomes after cardiac arrest?Resuscitation · 2025Article
- Predicting Seizure Risk from Routine Electroencephalographs in Medical Intensive Care Units Using the 2HELPS2B Score.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Management of non-Cardiac Organ Failure in cardiogenic shock.American heart journal plus : cardiology research and practice · 2025Article
- Early Burst Suppression Similarity Association with Structural Brain Injury Severity on MRI After Cardiac Arrest.Neurocritical care · 2025Article
- Optimizing brain protection after cardiac arrest: advanced strategies and best practices.Interface focus · 2024Review
- The Role of Routine Electroencephalography in the Diagnosis of Seizures in Medical Intensive Care Units.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Automated Seizure Detection in Patients with Cardiac Arrest: A Retrospective Review of Ceribell™ Rapid-EEG Recordings.Neurocritical care · 2023Article
- Neurophysiology State Dynamics Underlying Acute Neurologic Recovery After Cardiac Arrest.Neurology · 2023Article
- Targeted Temperature Management in Cardiac Arrest: An Updated Narrative Review.Cardiology and therapy · 2023Review
- Article
- Revisiting EEG as part of the multidisciplinary approach to post-cardiac arrest care and prognostication: A review.Resuscitation plus · 2022Review
- Deep learning of early brain imaging to predict post-arrest electroencephalography.Resuscitation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
8 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Importance: Epileptiform electroencephalographic (EEG) patterns are common after resuscitation from cardiac arrest, are associated with patient outcome, and may require treatment. It is unknown whether continuous EEG monitoring is needed to detect these patterns or if brief intermittent monitoring is sufficient. If continuous monitoring is required, the necessary duration of observation is unknown. Objective: To quantify the time-dependent sensitivity of continuous EEG for epileptiform event detection, and to compare continuous EEG to several alternative EEG-monitoring strategies for post-cardiac arrest outcome prediction. Design, Setting, and Participants: This observational cohort study was conducted in 2 academic medical centers between September 2010 and January 2018. Participants included 759 adults who were comatose after being resuscitated from cardiac arrest and who underwent 24 hours or more of EEG monitoring. Main Outcomes and Measures: Epileptiform EEG patterns associated with neurological outcome at hospital discharge, such as seizures likely to cause secondary injury. Results: Overall, 759 patients were included in the analysis; 281 (37.0%) were female, and the mean (SD) age was 58 (17) years. Epileptiform EEG activity was observed in 414 participants (54.5%), of whom only 26 (3.4%) developed potentially treatable seizures. Brief intermittent EEG had an estimated 66% (95% CI, 62%-69%) to 68% (95% CI, 66%-70%) sensitivity for detection of prognostic epileptiform events. Depending on initial continuity of the EEG background, 0 to 51 hours of monitoring were needed to achieve 95% sensitivity for the detection of prognostic epileptiform events. Brief intermittent EEG had a sensitivity of 7% (95% CI, 4%-12%) to 8% (95% CI, 4%-12%) for the detection of potentially treatable seizures, and 0 to 53 hours of continuous monitoring were needed to achieve 95% sensitivity for the detection of potentially treatable seizures. Brief intermittent EEG results yielded similar information compared with continuous EEG results when added to multivariable models predicting neurological outcome. Conclusions and Relevance: Compared with continuous EEG monitoring, brief intermittent monitoring was insensitive for detection of epileptiform events. Monitoring EEG results significantly improved multimodality prediction of neurological outcome, but continuous monitoring appeared to add little additional information compared with brief intermittent monitoring.
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.