儿科心脏骤停后循环恢复后神经系统良好预后的预测:系统综述和荟萃分析。

IF 6.5 1区 医学 Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE Resuscitation Pub Date : 2024-12-30 DOI:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2024.110483
Barnaby R Scholefield, Janice Tijssen, Saptharishi Lalgudi Ganesan, Mirjam Kool, Thomaz Bittencourt Couto, Alexis Topjian, Dianne L Atkins, Jason Acworth, Will McDevitt, Suzanne Laughlin, Anne-Marie Guerguerian
{"title":"儿科心脏骤停后循环恢复后神经系统良好预后的预测:系统综述和荟萃分析。","authors":"Barnaby R Scholefield, Janice Tijssen, Saptharishi Lalgudi Ganesan, Mirjam Kool, Thomaz Bittencourt Couto, Alexis Topjian, Dianne L Atkins, Jason Acworth, Will McDevitt, Suzanne Laughlin, Anne-Marie Guerguerian","doi":"10.1016/j.resuscitation.2024.110483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the ability of blood-biomarkers, clinical examination, electrophysiology, or neuroimaging, assessed within 14 days from return of circulation to predict good neurological outcome in children following out- or in-hospital cardiac arrest.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Trials databases were searched (2010-2023). Sensitivity and false positive rates (FPR) for good neurological outcome (defined as either 'no, mild, moderate disability or minimal change from baseline') in paediatric survivors were calculated for each predictor. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-five studies (2974 children) were included. The presence of any of the following had a FPR < 30% for predicting good neurological outcome with moderate (50-75%) or high (>75%) sensitivity: bilateral reactive pupillary light response within 12 h; motor component ≥ 4 on the Glasgow Coma Scale score at 6 h; bilateral somatosensory evoked potentials at 24-72 h; sleep spindles, and continuous cortical activity on electroencephalography within 24 h; or a normal brain MRI at 4-6d. Early (≤12 h) normal lactate levels (<2mmol/L) or normal s100b, NSE or MBP levels predicted good neurological outcome with FPR rate < 30% and low (<50%) sensitivity. All studies had moderate to high risk of bias with timing of measurement, definition of test, use of multi-modal tests, or outcome assessment heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical examination, electrophysiology, neuroimaging or blood-biomarkers as individual tests can predict good neurological outcome after cardiac arrest in children. However, evidence is often low quality and studies are heterogeneous. Use of a standardised, multimodal, prognostic algorithm should be studied and is likely of added value over single modality testing.</p>","PeriodicalId":21052,"journal":{"name":"Resuscitation","volume":" ","pages":"110483"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prediction of good neurological outcome after return of circulation following paediatric cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Barnaby R Scholefield, Janice Tijssen, Saptharishi Lalgudi Ganesan, Mirjam Kool, Thomaz Bittencourt Couto, Alexis Topjian, Dianne L Atkins, Jason Acworth, Will McDevitt, Suzanne Laughlin, Anne-Marie Guerguerian\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.resuscitation.2024.110483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To evaluate the ability of blood-biomarkers, clinical examination, electrophysiology, or neuroimaging, assessed within 14 days from return of circulation to predict good neurological outcome in children following out- or in-hospital cardiac arrest.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Trials databases were searched (2010-2023). Sensitivity and false positive rates (FPR) for good neurological outcome (defined as either 'no, mild, moderate disability or minimal change from baseline') in paediatric survivors were calculated for each predictor. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-five studies (2974 children) were included. The presence of any of the following had a FPR < 30% for predicting good neurological outcome with moderate (50-75%) or high (>75%) sensitivity: bilateral reactive pupillary light response within 12 h; motor component ≥ 4 on the Glasgow Coma Scale score at 6 h; bilateral somatosensory evoked potentials at 24-72 h; sleep spindles, and continuous cortical activity on electroencephalography within 24 h; or a normal brain MRI at 4-6d. Early (≤12 h) normal lactate levels (<2mmol/L) or normal s100b, NSE or MBP levels predicted good neurological outcome with FPR rate < 30% and low (<50%) sensitivity. All studies had moderate to high risk of bias with timing of measurement, definition of test, use of multi-modal tests, or outcome assessment heterogeneity.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Clinical examination, electrophysiology, neuroimaging or blood-biomarkers as individual tests can predict good neurological outcome after cardiac arrest in children. However, evidence is often low quality and studies are heterogeneous. Use of a standardised, multimodal, prognostic algorithm should be studied and is likely of added value over single modality testing.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":21052,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Resuscitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"110483\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Resuscitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2024.110483\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Resuscitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resuscitation.2024.110483","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评估血液生物标志物、临床检查、电生理学或神经影像学在血液循环恢复后14天内评估的能力,以预测院外或院内心脏骤停后儿童良好的神经预后。方法:检索Medline、EMBASE和Cochrane Trials数据库(2010-2023年)。计算儿童幸存者良好神经预后(定义为“无、轻度、中度残疾或与基线相比变化最小”)的敏感性和假阳性率(FPR)。使用QUIPS工具评估偏倚风险。结果:纳入35项研究(2974名儿童)。以下任何一种情况均具有FPR(75%)敏感性:12h内双侧瞳孔反应性光响应;6小时格拉斯哥昏迷量表运动成分评分≥4分;24-72h双侧体感诱发电位;睡眠纺锤波,24小时内脑电图连续皮层活动;或在第4-6天进行正常的脑部MRI检查。结论:临床检查、电生理学、神经影像学或血液生物标志物作为单项检测可预测儿童心脏骤停后良好的神经预后。然而,证据往往是低质量的,研究是异质的。应该研究使用标准化的、多模态的预测算法,这可能比单模态测试更有价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Prediction of good neurological outcome after return of circulation following paediatric cardiac arrest: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Aim: To evaluate the ability of blood-biomarkers, clinical examination, electrophysiology, or neuroimaging, assessed within 14 days from return of circulation to predict good neurological outcome in children following out- or in-hospital cardiac arrest.

Methods: Medline, EMBASE and Cochrane Trials databases were searched (2010-2023). Sensitivity and false positive rates (FPR) for good neurological outcome (defined as either 'no, mild, moderate disability or minimal change from baseline') in paediatric survivors were calculated for each predictor. Risk of bias was assessed using the QUIPS tool.

Results: Thirty-five studies (2974 children) were included. The presence of any of the following had a FPR < 30% for predicting good neurological outcome with moderate (50-75%) or high (>75%) sensitivity: bilateral reactive pupillary light response within 12 h; motor component ≥ 4 on the Glasgow Coma Scale score at 6 h; bilateral somatosensory evoked potentials at 24-72 h; sleep spindles, and continuous cortical activity on electroencephalography within 24 h; or a normal brain MRI at 4-6d. Early (≤12 h) normal lactate levels (<2mmol/L) or normal s100b, NSE or MBP levels predicted good neurological outcome with FPR rate < 30% and low (<50%) sensitivity. All studies had moderate to high risk of bias with timing of measurement, definition of test, use of multi-modal tests, or outcome assessment heterogeneity.

Conclusions: Clinical examination, electrophysiology, neuroimaging or blood-biomarkers as individual tests can predict good neurological outcome after cardiac arrest in children. However, evidence is often low quality and studies are heterogeneous. Use of a standardised, multimodal, prognostic algorithm should be studied and is likely of added value over single modality testing.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Resuscitation
Resuscitation 医学-急救医学
CiteScore
12.00
自引率
18.50%
发文量
556
审稿时长
21 days
期刊介绍: Resuscitation is a monthly international and interdisciplinary medical journal. The papers published deal with the aetiology, pathophysiology and prevention of cardiac arrest, resuscitation training, clinical resuscitation, and experimental resuscitation research, although papers relating to animal studies will be published only if they are of exceptional interest and related directly to clinical cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Papers relating to trauma are published occasionally but the majority of these concern traumatic cardiac arrest.
期刊最新文献
Implications of an Individualized Resuscitation Strategy Using Continuous Rhythm and Physiologic Status Assessment During Ongoing CPR. Unraveling some of the myth about drowning, out-of-hospital cardiac arrest and outcomes: Many critical factors and processes, most of them disappointingly difficult to manage. Who put the "E" in CPR: Equity before Extracorporeal? Using cardiac arrest registries for clinical trials by adding wagons to a rolling train. A retrospective 'target trial emulation' comparing amiodarone and lidocaine for adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest resuscitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1