Gap Analysis Regarding Prognostication in Neurocritical Care: A Joint Statement from the German Neurocritical Care Society and the Neurocritical Care Society

Are providers overconfident in predicting outcome after cardiac arrest?

AIM

To quantify the accuracy of health care providers' predictions of survival and function at hospital discharge in a prospective cohort of patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest. To test whether self-reported confidence in their predictions was associated with increased accuracy and whether this relationship varied across providers.

METHODOLOGY

We presented critical care and neurology providers with clinical vignettes using real data from post-arrest patients. We asked providers to predict survival, function at discharge, and report their confidence in these predictions. We used mixed effects models to explore predictors of confidence, accuracy, and the relationship between the two.

RESULTS

We completed 470 assessments of 62 patients with 65 providers. Of patients, 49 (78%) died and 9 (15%) had functionally favourable survival. Providers accurately predicted survival in 308/470 (66%) assessments. In most errors (146/162, 90%), providers incorrectly predicted survival. Providers accurately predicted function in 349/470 (74%) assessments. In most errors (114/121, 94%), providers incorrectly predicted favourable functional recovery. Providers were confident (median confidence predicting survival 80 [IQR 60-90]; median confidence predicting function 80 [IQR 60-95]). Confidence explained 9% and 18% of variation in accuracy predicting survival and function, respectively. We observed significant between-provider variability in accuracy (median odds ratio (MOR) for predicting survival 2.93, 95%CI 1.94-5.52; MOR for predicting function 5.42, 95%CI 3.01-13.2).

CONCLUSIONS

Providers varied in accuracy predicting post-arrest outcomes and most errors were optimistic. Self-reported confidence explained little variation in accuracy.

Resuscitating the Globally Ischemic Brain: TTM and Beyond

Cardiac arrest (CA) afflicts ~ 550,000 people each year in the USA. A small fraction of CA sufferers survive with a majority of these survivors emerging in a comatose state. Many CA survivors suffer devastating global brain injury with some remaining indefinitely in a comatose state. The pathogenesis of global brain injury secondary to CA is complex. Mechanisms of CA-induced brain injury include ischemia, hypoxia, cytotoxicity, inflammation, and ultimately, irreversible neuronal damage. Due to this complexity, it is critical for clinicians to have access as early as possible to quantitative metrics for diagnosing injury severity, accurately predicting outcome, and informing patient care. Current recommendations involve using multiple modalities including clinical exam, electrophysiology, brain imaging, and molecular biomarkers. This multi-faceted approach is designed to improve prognostication to avoid "self-fulfilling" prophecy and early withdrawal of life-sustaining treatments. Incorporation of emerging dynamic monitoring tools such as diffuse optical technologies may provide improved diagnosis and early prognostication to better inform treatment. Currently, targeted temperature management (TTM) is the leading treatment, with the number of patients needed to treat being ~ 6 in order to improve outcome for one patient. Future avenues of treatment, which may potentially be combined with TTM, include pharmacotherapy, perfusion/oxygenation targets, and pre/postconditioning. In this review, we provide a bench to bedside approach to delineate the pathophysiology, prognostication methods, current targeted therapies, and future directions of research surrounding hypoxic-ischemic brain injury (HIBI) secondary to CA.

Improving Prediction of Favourable Outcome After 6 Months in Patients with Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Using Physiological Cerebral Parameters in a Multivariable Logistic Regression Model

Background/Objective

Current severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) outcome prediction models calculate the chance of unfavourable outcome after 6 months based on parameters measured at admission. We aimed to improve current models with the addition of continuously measured neuromonitoring data within the first 24 h after intensive care unit neuromonitoring.

Methods

Forty-five severe TBI patients with intracranial pressure/cerebral perfusion pressure monitoring from two teaching hospitals covering the period May 2012 to January 2019 were analysed. Fourteen high-frequency physiological parameters were selected over multiple time periods after the start of neuromonitoring (0–6 h, 0–12 h, 0–18 h, 0–24 h). Besides systemic physiological parameters and extended Corticosteroid Randomisation after Significant Head Injury (CRASH) score, we added estimates of (dynamic) cerebral volume, cerebral compliance and cerebrovascular pressure reactivity indices to the model. A logistic regression model was trained for each time period on selected parameters to predict outcome after 6 months. The parameters were selected using forward feature selection. Each model was validated by leave-one-out cross-validation.

Results

A logistic regression model using CRASH as the sole parameter resulted in an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.76. For each time period, an increased AUC was found using up to 5 additional parameters. The highest AUC (0.90) was found for the 0–6 h period using 5 parameters that describe mean arterial blood pressure and physiological cerebral indices.

Conclusions

Current TBI outcome prediction models can be improved by the addition of neuromonitoring bedside parameters measured continuously within the first 24 h after the start of neuromonitoring. As these factors might be modifiable by treatment during the admission, testing in a larger (multicenter) data set is warranted.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s12028-020-00930-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.