Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A prospective study of outcome predictors after severe brain injury in children

  • Pediatric Original
  • Published:
Intensive Care Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To directly compare the predictive powers of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) to those of motor and pupillary responses.

Design and setting

Prospective clinical study in a paediatric intensive care unit.

Patients and participants

102 severely brain-injured children less than 15 years of age.

Measurements and results

SEPs and motor and pupillary responses were serially recorded during the first 9 days after admission. Initial, last and those tests performed on or after day 2 were analysed. Outcome was assessed 5 years after injury. SEPs had equal or superior predictive statistics and ROC curves compared to the other tests with few exceptions. Pupillary responses had higher sensitivity for favourable outcome prediction while for unfavourable outcome prediction the last motor responses had higher sensitivity, and the last pupillary responses had slightly higher specificity. Combining SEPs and motor responses provided the best combination for predicting unfavourable outcome.

Conclusions

SEPs are the best overall predictor of outcome while motor and pupillary responses have advantages in some specific areas. The routine use of SEPs should be considered in the prediction of outcome of severely brain-injured patients.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Carter BG, Butt W (2001) A review of the use of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs) in the prediction of outcome after severe brain injury. Crit Care Med 29:178–186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Zandbergen EGJ, de Haan RJ, Stoutenbeek CP, Koelman JHTM, Hijdra A (1998) Systematic review of early prediction of poor outcome in anoxic-ischaemic coma. Lancet 352:1808–1812

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Carter BG, Taylor A, Butt W (1999) Severe brain injury in children: long-term outcome and its prediction using somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs). Intensive Care Med 25:722–728

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jennett B, Bond M (1975) Assessment of outcome after severe brain damage. Lancet I:480–484

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Altman DG (1991) In: Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall. Melbourne

  6. Carter BG, Butt W (2005) Are somatosensory evoked potentials the best predictor of outcome after severe brain injury? A systematic review. Intensive Care Med (http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00134-005-2633-1, in press)

  7. Anderson DC, Bundlie S, Rockswold GL (1984) Multimodality evoked potentials in closed head trauma. Arch Neurol 41:369–374

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Bassetti C, Bomio F, Mathis J, Hess CW (1996) Early prognosis in coma after cardiac arrest: a prospective clinical, electrophysiological, and biochemical study of 60 patients. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 61:610–615

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Cant BR, Hume AL, Judson JA, Shaw NA (1986) The assessment of severe head injury by short-latency somatosensory and brain-stem auditory evoked potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol 65:188–195

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Nakabayashi M, Kurokawa A, Yamamoto Y (2001) Immediate prediction of recovery of consciousness after cardiac arrest. Intensive Care Med 27:1210–1214

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ying Z, Schmid UD, Schmid J, Hess CW (1992) Motor and somatosensory evoked potentials in coma: analysis and relation to clinical status and outcome. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 55:470–474

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Beca J, Cox PN, Taylor MJ, Bohn D, Butt W, Logan WJ, Rutka JT, Barker G (1995) Somatosensory evoked potentials for prediction of outcome in acute severe brain injury. J Pediatr 126:44–49

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chen R, Bolton CF, Young GB (1996) Prediction of outcome in patients with anoxic coma: a clinical and electrophysiologic study. Crit Care Med 24:672–678

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kent DL, Larson EB (1992) Disease, level of impact, and quality of research methods. Three dimensions of clinical efficacy assessment applied to magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 27:245–254

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cochrane Methods Group on Systematic Review of Screening and Diagnostic Tests (1996) Recommended method.http://www.cochrane.org/cochrane/sadtdoc1.htm, accessed 14 July 2002

  16. Glasiou P, Irwig L (1998) Meta-analyses of diagnostic tests. In: Armitage P, Colton T (eds) Encyclopaedia of biostatistics. Wiley, West Sussex

  17. Madl C, Grimm G, Kramer L, Yeganehfar W, Sterz F, Schneider B, Kranz A, Schneeweiss B, Lenz K (1993) Early prediction of individual outcome after cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Lancet 341:855–858

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nuwer MR, Aminoff M, Desmedt J, Eisen AA, Goodin D, Matsuoka S, Mauguere F, Shibasaki H, Sutherling W, Vibert JF (1994) IFCN recommended standards for short latency somatosensory evoked potentials. Report of an IFCN committee. Electroencepalogr Clin Neurophysiol 91:6–11

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Lutschg J, Pfenninger J, Ludin HP, Vassella F (1983) Brain-stem auditory evoked potentials and early somatosensory evoked potentials in neurointensively treated comatose children. Am J Dis Child 137:421–426

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sutton LN, Frewen T, Marsh R, Jaggi J, Bruce DA (1982) The effects of deep barbiturate coma on multimodality evoked potentials. J Neurosurg 57:178–185

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. McPherson RW, Sell B, Traystman RJ (1986) Effects of thiopental, fentanyl, and etomidate on upper extremity somatosensory evoked potentials in humans. Anesthesiology 65:584–589

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Koht A, Schutz W, Schmidt G, Schramm J, Watanabe E (1988) Effects of etomidate, midazolam and thiopentone on median nerve somatosensory evoked potentials and the additive effects of fentanyl and nitrous oxide. Anesth Analg 67:435–441

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lauer K, Munshi C, Larson S (1994) The effect of midazolam on median nerve somatosensory evoked potentials. J Clin Monit 10:181–184

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Mauguiere F, Allison T, Babiloni C, Buehner H, Eisen AA, Goodin DS, Jones SJ, Kakigi R, Matsuoka S, Nuwer M, Rossini PM, Shihasaki H (1999) Somatosensory evoked potentials. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol Suppl 52:79–90

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zweig MH, Campbell G (1993) Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) plots: a fundamental evaluation tool in clinical medicine. Clin Chem 39:561–577

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Biggerstaff BJ (2000) Comparing diagnostic tests: a simple graphic using likelihood ratios. Stat Med 19:649–663

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Edgren E, Hedstrand V, Kelsey S, Sutton-Tyrrell K, Safar P, BRCTI Study Group (1994) Assessment of neurological prognosis in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest. Lancet 343:1055–1059

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Attia J, Cook DJ (1998) Prognosis in anoxic and traumatic coma. Crit Care Clin 14:497–511

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Paediatric Intensive Care Unit, Royal Children’s Hospital, Flemington Rd., 3052, Parkville, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    B. G. Carter & W. Butt

Authors
  1. B. G. Carter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. W. Butt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to B. G. Carter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carter, B.G., Butt, W. A prospective study of outcome predictors after severe brain injury in children. Intensive Care Med 31, 840–845 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-005-2634-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-005-2634-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation