ArticleCritical care (London, England)2025
Prognostic value of brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs) and middle latency auditory evoked potentials (MLAEPs) in unconscious patients after cardiac arrest.
Article in Critical care (London, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Prolonged P14 latency predicts mortality in deep sedation: implications for neuroprotective sedation strategies-author's reply.Intensive care medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsAssessing neurological outcome after cardiac arrest (CA) remains challenging. We aim to evaluate the prognostic value of brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs) and middle latency auditory evoked potentials (MLAEP) in patients with disorders of consciousness (DoC) after CA and indeterminate outcome according to current recommendations (i.e., no highly malignant EEG and bilateral absence of N20).
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted using data collected prospectively from two intensive care units. The prognostic value of the absence of wave V, an abnormal conduction latency between waves III and V, an abnormal I/V amplitude ratio on BAEPs, and the absence of Na and Pa responses on MLAEPs was assessed. The primary outcome was the best Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended (GOS-E) level within 3 months. A GOS-E level ≤ 2 (death or vegetative state) was defined as a poor outcome.
results93 patients were included, 74.2% of whom were men, with a mean age of 58 years IQR [47-67]. Of these, 67/93 (72%) had a poor outcome. Unilateral absence of wave V on BAEPs was highly specific for poor outcome (Sp 96.1%), despite low sensitivity (Se 10.4%). A unilateral I/V amplitude ratio > 1 had a specificity of 87.5%, but a low sensitivity of 11.5%. Prolonged brainstem conduction time (III-V latency > 2 ms) was poorly specific for a poor outcome (Sp 70.8%). Conversely, the absence of Na and Pa on MLAEP had 100% specificity for poor outcome, with a sensitivity of 31.8%.
conclusionIn unconscious patients after CA with an indeterminate outcome based on neurophysiological criteria, the absence of wave V on BAEPs and the absence of Na/Pa on MLAEPs were highly specific for poor outcome, despite a low sensitivity. These results suggest that AEPs may serve as a second prognostic marker to fulfill the two-criterion requirement of the ERC/ESICM recommendations.
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.