Role of short latency evoked potentials in the diagnosis of brain death

Facco, Enrico; Munari, Marina; Gallo, F; Volpin, S. M.; Behr, Astrid Ursula; Baratto, Fabio; Giron, Giampiero

doi:10.1016/s1388-2457(02)00259-6

Cited by 63 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, of 130 clinically brain dead patients, BAER waves III or V (generated in the brain stem) were present in six patients; with SSEPs waves following the cervical potential wave were present in four. 19 In another series of 30 brain dead patients, the BAERs and the N20 SSEP responses were absent in all cases. 23 Of 51 clinically brain dead children, all those tested for BAERs and SSEPs had absent brain stem potentials.…”

Section: Early Component Evoked Potentialsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Brief review: The role of ancillary tests in the neurological determination of death

Young

Shemie

Doig

et al. 2006

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Early Component Evoked Potentialsmentioning

confidence: 88%

Brief review: The role of ancillary tests in the neurological determination of death

Young

Shemie

Doig

et al. 2006

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…EEG, evoked potentials, SLSEP, and TCD have been used as diagnostic techniques; however, results have been variable. The sensitivity of EEG in diagnosis of brain death ranges from 69.6% (Grigg et al, 1987) to 92.04% (Luo et al, 2006a;2006b), the sensitivity of SLSEP ranges from 97.3% to 100% (Facco et al, 1990;2002), and the sensitivity of TCD ranges from 70.5% to 100% (Kuo , 2006). The sensitivity of these methods has some variability, for example, in one study, the sensitivity changed from 73.91% to 80.43% during two examinations (Luo et al, 2006a;2006b).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although the diagnosis of brain death is clinical, investigative techniques have an important role to confirm the diagnosis. Previous research has demonstrated that these three methods (EEG, SLSEP, and TCD) may not be ideal when used individually (Grigg et al, 1987;Facco et al, 1990;2002;Kuo et al, 2006). Here, we examined the combinatory benefits of EEG, SLSEP, and TCD to most reliably and accurately diagnose brain death in the clinical setting.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Benefits of combination of electroencephalography, short latency somatosensory evoked potentials, and transcranial Doppler techniques for confirming brain death

Wang

Yuan

et al. 2008

J. Zhejiang Univ. Sci. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Objective: Optimization of combining electroencephalography (EEG), short latency somatosensory evoked potentials (SLSEP) and transcranial Doppler (TCD) techniques to diagnose brain death. Methods: One hundred and eleven patients (69 males, 42 females) from the major hospitals of Zhejiang Province were examined with portable EEG, SLSEP and TCD devices. Re-examinations occurred ≤12 h later. Results: The first examination revealed that the combination of SLSEP and EEG led to more sensitive diagnoses than the combination of SLSEP and TCD. Re-examination confirmed this and also revealed that the combination of TCD and EEG was the most sensitive. Conclusion: The results show that using multiple techniques to diagnose brain death is superior to using single method, and that the combination of SLSEP and EEG is better than other combinations.

show abstract

“…Facco et al [6] showed that SEP measurement in combination with auditory brainstem responses (ABR) can confirm and exclude brain death in patients with a clinical and EEG picture of brain death. Despite the reliability of SEP in the presented series, the decision to continue with medical interventions in our department is not based upon SEP recordings alone.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%