Prognostic Value of Evoked Responses and Event-Related Brain Potentials in

Abstract

REVIEWARTICLEvegetative state or death. These categories, i.e., the lack of recovery of the capacity for conscious awareness, represent states that for most individuals and families would not warrant continued high level ICU support. Other levels of survival, with preserved consciousness, are more difficult for management decisions. Conversely, the predictive values of tests for excellent outcomes need to be considered in any prognostic battery.A number of clinical algorithms have been developed, beginning with the seminal study of Levy et al. 9 These rely on the premise that severe brainstem dysfunction reflects even

Signal and noise in P300 recordings to visual stimuli

“…In recent years, it has received increased attention as a diagnostic tool [2,3]. For instance, it has been used as a measure of cognitive impairment after brain injuries [4,5], during coma [6], and in patients with multiple sclerosis [7,8]. A particularly interesting application in ophthalmology may be the use of the P300 for discerning between neurological and psychiatric disorders on one hand and malingering on the other hand [9,10] in cases of suspected functional visual loss.…”

Practice Parameter: Prediction of outcome in comatose survivors after cardiopulmonary resuscitation (an evidence-based review) [RETIRED]

“…Whether the preservation of responses to multiple event-related or cognitive event-related potentials may prove useful in indicating favorable outcomes is yet unclear. 70 Conclusions. Bilateral absence of the N20 component of the SSEP with median nerve stimulation recorded on days 1 to 3 or later after CPR accurately predicts a poor outcome.…”

Evaluation of traumatic brain injury: Brain potentials in diagnosis, function, and prognosis

“…Thus, their presence suggests that cognitive, as well as sensory, processing is, at least partially, intact in comatose patients (Fischer et al, 2008(Fischer et al, , 2010Lew et al, 2006;Wang et al, 2004). Fischer et al (2008) found a significant correlation between the proportion of subjects who awoke and the presence of the P3a.…”

“…Because coma may not be permanent, the question arises as to how to predict outcome and facilitate recovery. The Glasgow Coma Scale (Teasdale and Jennett, 1974) and neuroimaging methods, such as CT, MRI, and positron emission tomography (PET), have proven to be of limited value in the assessment of consciousness and the prediction of recovery from coma (Gawryluk et al, 2010;Lew et al, 2006;Wang et al, 2004). Newer neuroimaging techniques, including diffusion tensor imaging (DTI; Basser et al, 1994) and functional MRI (fMRI; Belliveau et al, 1991) may have the potential to provide sensitive information about the injury, but they are costly and require access to facilities with advanced imaging capabilities.…”