Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35290522›Full record

ArticleAnnals of intensive care2022

SSEP N20 and P25 amplitudes predict poor and good neurologic outcomes after cardiac arrest.

Sarah Benghanem, Lee S Nguyen, Martine Gavaret, Jean-Paul Mira, Frédéric Pène, Julien Charpentier, Angela Marchi, Alain Cariou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of intensive care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Role of Neurophysiologic Testing in Prognostication of Hypoxic-Ischemic Encephalopathy.Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Observational
  13. Review
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Sarah BenghanemMedical ICU, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France. sarah.benghanem@aphp.fr.
Lee S NguyenCMC Ambroise Paré, Research and Innovation, Neuilly-sur-Seine, France.
Martine GavaretMedical School, University of Paris, Paris, France.
Jean-Paul MiraMedical ICU, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Frédéric PèneMedical ICU, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Julien CharpentierMedical ICU, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.
Angela MarchiMedical School, University of Paris, Paris, France.
Alain CariouMedical ICU, Cochin Hospital, AP-HP, 27 rue du Faubourg Saint-Jacques, 75014, Paris, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTo assess in comatose patients after cardiac arrest (CA) if amplitudes of two somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEP) responses, namely, N20-baseline (N20-b) and N20-P25, are predictive of neurological outcome.

methodsMonocentric prospective study in a tertiary cardiac center between Nov 2019 and July-2021. All patients comatose at 72 h after CA with at least one SSEP recorded were included. The N20-b and N20-P25 amplitudes were automatically measured in microvolts (µV), along with other recommended prognostic markers (status myoclonus, neuron-specific enolase levels at 2 and 3 days, and EEG pattern). We assessed the predictive value of SSEP for neurologic outcome using the best Cerebral Performance Categories (CPC1 or 2 as good outcome) at 3 months (main endpoint) and 6 months (secondary endpoint). Specificity and sensitivity of different thresholds of SSEP amplitudes, alone or in combination with other prognostic markers, were calculated.

resultsAmong 82 patients, a poor outcome (CPC 3-5) was observed in 78% of patients at 3 months. The median time to SSEP recording was 3(2-4) days after CA, with a pattern "bilaterally absent" in 19 patients, "unilaterally present" in 4, and "bilaterally present" in 59 patients. The median N20-b amplitudes were different between patients with poor and good outcomes, i.e., 0.93 [0-2.05]µV vs. 1.56 [1.24-2.75]µV, respectively (p < 0.0001), as the median N20-P25 amplitudes (0.57 [0-1.43]µV in poor outcome vs. 2.64 [1.39-3.80]µV in good outcome patients p < 0.0001). An N20-b > 2 µV predicted good outcome with a specificity of 73% and a moderate sensitivity of 39%, although an N20-P25 > 3.2 µV was 93% specific and only 30% sensitive. A low voltage N20-b < 0.88 µV and N20-P25 < 1 µV predicted poor outcome with a high specificity (sp = 94% and 93%, respectively) and a moderate sensitivity (se = 50% and 66%). Association of "bilaterally absent or low voltage SSEP" patterns increased the sensitivity significantly as compared to "bilaterally absent" SSEP alone (se = 58 vs. 30%, p = 0.002) for prediction of poor outcome.

conclusionIn comatose patient after CA, both N20-b and N20-P25 amplitudes could predict both good and poor outcomes with high specificity but low to moderate sensitivity. Our results suggest that caution is needed regarding SSEP amplitudes in clinical routine, and that these indicators should be used in a multimodal approach for prognostication after cardiac arrest.

Indexed as

Cardiac arrestEEGNeuroprognosticationNSEPersistent comaPrognosisSomato sensory evoked potentialStatus myoclonus

Identifiers

PMID35290522
PMCPMC8924339

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.