Electroencephalographic features in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.
Cardiac arrest
ECMO
EEG
Electroencephalogram
Neurological complication
Outcome
Journal
Critical care (London, England)
ISSN: 1466-609X
Titre abrégé: Crit Care
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9801902
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 10 2020
30 10 2020
Historique:
received:
07
07
2020
accepted:
21
10
2020
entrez:
31
10
2020
pubmed:
1
11
2020
medline:
25
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Neurologic injury is one of the most frequent causes of death in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). As neurological examination is often unreliable in sedated patients, additional neuromonitoring is needed. However, the value of electroencephalogram (EEG) in adult ECMO patients has not been well assessed. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the occurrence of electroencephalographic abnormalities in patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and their association with 3-month neurologic outcome. Retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing venous-venous (V-V) or venous-arterial (V-A) ECMO with a concomitant EEG recording (April 2009-December 2018), either recorded intermittently or continuously. EEG background was classified into four categories: mild/moderate encephalopathy (i.e., mostly defined by the presence of reactivity), severe encephalopathy (mostly defined by the absence of reactivity), burst-suppression (BS) and suppressed background. Epileptiform activity (i.e., ictal EEG pattern, sporadic epileptiform discharges or periodic discharges) and asymmetry were also reported. EEG findings were analyzed according to unfavorable neurological outcome (UO, defined as Glasgow Outcome Scale < 4) at 3 months after discharge. A total of 139 patients (54 [41-62] years; 60 (43%) male gender) out of 596 met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Veno-arterial (V-A) ECMO was used in 98 (71%); UO occurred in 99 (71%) patients. Continuous EEG was performed in 113 (81%) patients. The analysis of EEG background showed that 29 (21%) patients had severe encephalopathy, 4 (3%) had BS and 19 (14%) a suppressed background. In addition, 11 (8%) of patients had seizures or status epilepticus, 10 (7%) had generalized periodic discharges or lateralized periodic discharges, and 27 (19%) had asymmetry on EEG. In the multivariate analysis, the occurrence of ischemic stroke or intracranial hemorrhage (OR 4.57 [1.25-16.74]; p = 0.02) and a suppressed background (OR 10.08 [1.24-82.20]; p = 0.03) were independently associated with UO. After an adjustment for covariates, an increasing probability for UO was observed with more severe EEG background categories. In adult patients treated with ECMO, EEG can identify patients with a high likelihood of poor outcome. In particular, suppressed background was independently associated with unfavorable neurological outcome.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Neurologic injury is one of the most frequent causes of death in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). As neurological examination is often unreliable in sedated patients, additional neuromonitoring is needed. However, the value of electroencephalogram (EEG) in adult ECMO patients has not been well assessed. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the occurrence of electroencephalographic abnormalities in patients treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and their association with 3-month neurologic outcome.
METHODS
Retrospective analysis of all patients undergoing venous-venous (V-V) or venous-arterial (V-A) ECMO with a concomitant EEG recording (April 2009-December 2018), either recorded intermittently or continuously. EEG background was classified into four categories: mild/moderate encephalopathy (i.e., mostly defined by the presence of reactivity), severe encephalopathy (mostly defined by the absence of reactivity), burst-suppression (BS) and suppressed background. Epileptiform activity (i.e., ictal EEG pattern, sporadic epileptiform discharges or periodic discharges) and asymmetry were also reported. EEG findings were analyzed according to unfavorable neurological outcome (UO, defined as Glasgow Outcome Scale < 4) at 3 months after discharge.
RESULTS
A total of 139 patients (54 [41-62] years; 60 (43%) male gender) out of 596 met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Veno-arterial (V-A) ECMO was used in 98 (71%); UO occurred in 99 (71%) patients. Continuous EEG was performed in 113 (81%) patients. The analysis of EEG background showed that 29 (21%) patients had severe encephalopathy, 4 (3%) had BS and 19 (14%) a suppressed background. In addition, 11 (8%) of patients had seizures or status epilepticus, 10 (7%) had generalized periodic discharges or lateralized periodic discharges, and 27 (19%) had asymmetry on EEG. In the multivariate analysis, the occurrence of ischemic stroke or intracranial hemorrhage (OR 4.57 [1.25-16.74]; p = 0.02) and a suppressed background (OR 10.08 [1.24-82.20]; p = 0.03) were independently associated with UO. After an adjustment for covariates, an increasing probability for UO was observed with more severe EEG background categories.
CONCLUSIONS
In adult patients treated with ECMO, EEG can identify patients with a high likelihood of poor outcome. In particular, suppressed background was independently associated with unfavorable neurological outcome.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33126887
doi: 10.1186/s13054-020-03353-z
pii: 10.1186/s13054-020-03353-z
pmc: PMC7598240
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
629Références
Clin Neurophysiol. 2014 May;125(5):947-54
pubmed: 24286857
Br J Anaesth. 2015 Jul;115 Suppl 1:i46-i57
pubmed: 26174300
Lancet. 1975 Mar 1;1(7905):480-4
pubmed: 46957
PLoS One. 2015 Oct 08;10(10):e0139969
pubmed: 26447697
J Neurosurg Pediatr. 2011 Apr;7(4):338-44
pubmed: 21456903
Intensive Care Med. 2013 May;39(5):838-46
pubmed: 23291732
World J Crit Care Med. 2013 Nov 04;2(4):40-7
pubmed: 24701415
Crit Care Med. 2014 Oct;42(10):2244-51
pubmed: 25072756
Neurocrit Care. 2016 Apr;24(2):153-62
pubmed: 26567031
Crit Care Med. 2018 May;46(5):e389-e394
pubmed: 29389771
Intensive Care Med. 2013 Aug;39(8):1337-51
pubmed: 23653183
Neurocrit Care. 2012 Feb;16(1):114-22
pubmed: 21638118
J Clin Neurophysiol. 2013 Feb;30(1):1-27
pubmed: 23377439
Neurocrit Care. 2020 Aug 12;:
pubmed: 32789602
Crit Care Resusc. 2013 Sep;15(3):172-8
pubmed: 23944202
Resuscitation. 2017 Nov;120:8-13
pubmed: 28844933
ASAIO J. 2020 Apr;66(4):388-393
pubmed: 31045914
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2015 Jul;16(6):558-64
pubmed: 25828783
J Neurotrauma. 2007 Apr;24(4):579-90
pubmed: 17439342
J Clin Neurol. 2015 Oct;11(4):383-9
pubmed: 26320848
J Neurotrauma. 1998 Aug;15(8):573-85
pubmed: 9726257
J Clin Med. 2020 Jun 04;9(6):
pubmed: 32512910
Ann Neurol. 2018 May;83(5):958-969
pubmed: 29659050
Crit Care Med. 2017 Aug;45(8):1389-1397
pubmed: 28538440
Neurocrit Care. 2006;4(2):103-12
pubmed: 16627897
Clin Perinatol. 1997 Sep;24(3):655-75
pubmed: 9394865