Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36991177›Full record

ArticleNeurocritical care2024

A Novel Approach to Screen for Somatosensory Evoked Potentials in Critical Care.

Aude Sangare, Benjamin Rohaut, Alaina Borden, Julie Zyss, Angela Velazquez, Kevin Doyle, Lionel Naccache, Jan Claassen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Neurocritical care, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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.

Aude Sangare *Brain Institute, ICM, CNRS, Sorbonne Université, Inserm U1127, UMR 7225, Paris, France. aude.sangare@aphp.fr.ORCID 0000-0001-5212-2104
Benjamin Rohaut *Brain Institute, ICM, CNRS, Sorbonne Université, Inserm U1127, UMR 7225, Paris, France.
Alaina BordenDepartment of Neurophysiology, Pitié-Salpêtrière, Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Julie ZyssDepartment of Neurophysiology, Pitié-Salpêtrière, Groupe Hospitalier Universitaire Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris Sorbonne Université, Paris, France.
Angela VelazquezDepartment of Neurology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Kevin DoyleDepartment of Neurology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.
Lionel Naccache *Brain Institute, ICM, CNRS, Sorbonne Université, Inserm U1127, UMR 7225, Paris, France.
Jan Claassen *Department of Neurology, Columbia University, New York, NY, USA.

Funding

BAsIC - Brain-computer-interface practical Application in the Intensive Care unit: a pilot studyR03NS112760 · NINDS · COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEALTH SCIENCES · PI CLAASSEN, JAN · 2019 to 2020
$162k
NINDS NIH HHS R03 NS112760
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSomatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) help prognostication, particularly in patients with diffuse brain injury. However, use of SSEP is limited in critical care. We propose a novel, low-cost approach allowing acquisition of screening SSEP using widely available intensive care unit (ICU) equipment, specifically a peripheral "train-of-four" stimulator and standard electroencephalograph.

methodsThe median nerve was stimulated using a train-of-four stimulator, and a standard 21-channel electroencephalograph was recorded to generate the screening SSEP. Generation of the SSEP was supported by visual inspection, univariate event-related potentials statistics, and a multivariate support vector machine (SVM) decoding algorithm. This approach was validated in 15 healthy volunteers and validated against standard SSEPs in 10 ICU patients. The ability of this approach to predict poor neurological outcome, defined as death, vegetative state, or severe disability at 6 months, was tested in an additional set of 39 ICU patients.

resultsIn each of the healthy volunteers, both the univariate and the SVM methods reliably detected SSEP responses. In patients, when compared against the standard SSEP method, the univariate event-related potentials method matched in nine of ten patients (sensitivity = 94%, specificity = 100%), and the SVM had 100% sensitivity and specificity when compared with the standard method. For the 49 ICU patients, we performed both the univariate and the SVM methods: a bilateral absence of short latency responses (n = 8) predicted poor neurological outcome with 0% FPR (sensitivity = 21%, specificity = 100%).

conclusionsSomatosensory evoked potentials can reliably be recorded using the proposed approach. Given the very good but slightly lower sensitivity of absent SSEPs in the proposed screening approach, confirmation of absent SSEP responses using standard SSEP recordings is advised.

Indexed as

Evoked Potentials, SomatosensoryMedian NerveCritical CareHumansSensitivity and SpecificityDisorders of consciousnessIntensive care unitSomatosensory evoked potentials

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.