Continuous EEG in therapeutic hypothermia after cardiac arrest: Prognostic and clinical value
Citation Manager Formats
Make Comment
See Comments

We read with interest the study by Crepeau et al.1 who reviewed EEG in cardiac arrest survivors. They found that when EEG was performed during hypothermic and early normothermic periods, it might yield useful prognostic information.
These findings are important in cardiac arrest patients who are under neuromuscular paralysis for hypothermia and may not be able to display motor findings of seizure, myoclonus, or status epilepticus. The data are also important to add to earlier prognostic information and seizure detection. We similarly studied our cardiac arrest patients from 2006 to 2012 (n = 72) at Mayo Clinic in Florida, and analyzed the available EEG findings retrospectively (n = 38) during hypothermia or early normothermic period.
Most EEGs were 20-minute recordings but some were continuously recorded. Similar to the authors, we also found that certain EEG patterns, specifically generalized periodic epileptiform discharges (GPEDs) or suppression-burst (S-B) pattern (n = 12), suggested a trend toward worse outcome (i.e., Cerebral Performance Category [CPC] 3–5) dichotomized against good outcome (CPC 1–2) when compared against all other EEG patterns (delta, theta, alpha, or mixed frequencies, n = 26 with poor outcome, n = 9 good outcome, p = 0.087).
Our study was smaller than the current study and did not use the authors' EEG classification scheme yet we believe that GPEDs and S-B are potentially ominous prognostic patterns indicating widespread anoxic brain injury. Foreman et al.2 additionally showed that GPEDs may not be independently associated with poor prognosis alone, but are strongly predictive of nonconvulsive seizures and nonconvulsive status epilepticus, which can potentially add secondary brain injury to cardiac arrest patients.
References
- 1.↵
- Crepeau AZ,
- Rabinstein AR,
- Fugate JE,
- et al
- 2.↵
- Foreman B,
- Claassen J,
- Abou Khaled K,
- et al
- © 2013 American Academy of Neurology
Disputes & Debates: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
If you are uploading a letter concerning an article:
You must have updated your disclosures within six months: http://submit.neurology.org
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.