• Neurocritical care · Dec 2021

    Multicenter Study

    The Association Between Neurological Prognosis and the Degree of Blood-Brain Barrier Disruption in Cardiac Arrest Survivors Who Underwent Target Temperature Management.

    • Ga Ram Jeon, Hong Joon Ahn, Jung Soo Park, Insool Yoo, Yeonho You, Yong Chul Cho, Wonjoon Jeong, Changshin Kang, and Byung Kook Lee.
    • Department of Emergency Medicine, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejoen, Republic of Korea.
    • Neurocrit Care. 2021 Dec 1; 35 (3): 815-824.

    BackgroundThis study aimed to compare day-specific associations of blood-brain barrier (BBB) disruption with neurological outcome in survivors of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) treated with target temperature management (TTM) and lumbar drainage.MethodsThis retrospective single-center study included 68 survivors of OHCA who underwent TTM between April 2018 and December 2019. The albumin quotient (QA) was calculated as QA = albumincerebrospinal fluid/albuminserum immediately (day 1) and 24 (day 2), 48 (day 3), and 72 h (day 4) after the return of spontaneous circulation. The degree of BBB disruption was weighted using the following scoring system: QA value of 0.007 or less (normal), QA value greater than 0.007-0.01 (mild), QA value greater than 0.01-0.02 (moderate), and QA value greater than 0.02 (severe). Points were assigned as follows: 0 (normal), 1 (mild), 4 (moderate), and 9 (severe). Neurological outcome was determined at 6 months after the return of spontaneous circulation, as well as cerebral performance category (CPC), dichotomized as good (CPC score 1-2) and poor (CPC score 3-5) outcome.ResultsWe enrolled 68 patients (48 men, 71%); 37 (54%) patients had a poor neurological outcome. The distributions of poor versus good outcomes at 6 months in patients with moderate and severe BBB disruption were 19 of 22 (80%) vs. 18 of 46 (50%) on day 1, 31 of 37 (79%) vs. 6 of 31 (32%) on day 2, 32 of 37 (81%) vs. 5 of 31 (30%) on day 3, and 32 of 39 (85%) vs. 5 of 29 (30%) on day 4 (P < 0.001), respectively. Using receiver operating characteristic analyses, optimal cutoff values (sensitivity, specificity) of QA levels for the prediction of neurological outcome were as follows: day 1, greater than 0.009 (56.8%, 87.1%); day 2, greater than 0.012 (81.1%, 87.1%); day 3, greater than 0.013 (83.8%, 87.1%); day 4, greater than 0.013 (86.5%, 87.1%); the sum of all time points, greater than 0.039 (89.5%, 79.4%); and scoring system, greater than 9 (91.9%, 87.1%).ConclusionsIn this proof of concept study, QA was associated with poor neurological outcome in survivors of OHCA treated with TTM with no contraindication to lumbar drainage. A large multicenter prospective study is needed to validate the utility of BBB disruption as a prognosticator of neurological outcome.© 2021. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature and Neurocritical Care Society.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…