ArticleNeurology open access2026
Prognostic Significance of EEG Patterns in Post-Cardiac Arrest Coma: A Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study of 1,000 Patients.
Article in Neurology open access, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objective: The EEG (electroencephalogram) plays a crucial role in prognosticating outcomes for comatose patients after cardiac arrest (CA), but the precise probability of poor outcome (PPO) associated with specific EEG patterns and how it changes over time is not well understood. We aimed to quantify the PPO for individual EEG patterns, assess its precision, and evaluate time-dependent changes after CA. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed continuous EEGs from comatose adults treated at three Boston hospitals for CA (2010-2023). We evaluated the prognostic significance of 22 ACNS-standard patterns, and one additional pattern, "flat EEG (<2μV)", using PPO (i.e., positive predictive value for poor outcome) with 95 % Wilson confidence intervals as the primary metric; sensitivity, and false-positive rate (FPR) were secondary. Temporal variabilities were assessed in four epochs (0-24, 24-48, 48-72, >72 h) using linear regression. Poor and favorable outcomes were defined as death and survival to discharge, respectively. Results: Among 1,000 patients, the mean age was 58 years for survivors and 60 years for non-survivors; 59% of patients were male. Flat EEG demonstrated PPO of 1.00 across epochs, but CIs ranged from 0.89-1.00 at 24 hours and widened to 0.54-1.00 beyond 72 hours. Status epilepticus (SE) showed PPO of 0.80 (0.44-0.97) at 24 hours, 1.00 (0.74-1.00) at 48 hours, and 0.67 (0.09-0.99) after 72 hours. Suppression (< 10 μV), the most common historically termed highly "malignant" pattern (prevalence 50-65%), had a PPO of 0.76-0.83 and sensitivity of up to 0.80, with 17-24% of patients experiencing a favorable outcome. Time-dependent analysis further demonstrated that PPO for suppression increased over time, while sensitivity declined for burst-suppression and flat EEG. Conclusion: The prognostic uncertainty of EEG patterns post-CA is highly variable, and evolves within the first 72 hours. Flat EEG, and SE are highly specific prognosticators of poor outcome, but, importantly, they are rare and not infallible. Suppression identifies the most patients with poor outcomes but has moderately high FPRs and variable prognostic certainty over time. Future large-scale prospective studies that incorporate long-term outcomes are needed to validate these findings.
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.