Management of the comatose patient

Endovascular treatment in patients with coma that developed secondary to acute basilar artery occlusion

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of endovascular treatment (EVT) in patients with secondary coma following acute basilar artery occlusion (comatose patients) and to identify the impact of the Glasgow Coma Scale (GCS) score on medical decisions.

METHODS

Patients from the Endovascular Treatment for Acute Basilar Artery Occlusion study were divided into comatose and noncomatose cohorts. The primary outcome was favorable functional independence (modified Rankin Scale [mRS] scores 0-3). The safety outcome was 90-day mortality. Subgroup analysis was performed to identify populations best suited for EVT. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictive factors of clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Comatose patients who underwent EVT had more favorable functional outcomes and lower mortality compared with those who underwent standard medical treatment (functional outcomes: 15.98% vs 4.17%; mortality: 62.72% vs 82.29%). Moreover, EVT was associated with better outcomes in the cohort with GCS scores of 6-8 (mRS scores 0-3, 25.33% and mortality, 41.33%) than in the cohort with GCS scores of 3-5. Multivariate analysis indicated that EVT was an independent factor for favorable functional outcomes (adjusted OR 8.921, 95% CI 2.330-34.158) and mortality (adjusted OR 0.189, 95% CI 0.092-0.411) in comatose patients. The initial GCS score was an independent factor for favorable functional outcomes (adjusted OR 1.402, 95% CI 1.115-1.763) and mortality (adjusted OR 0.613, 95% CI 0.499-0.752) in comatose patients with EVT.

CONCLUSIONS

EVT significantly improved the prognosis of comatose patients, and patients with GCS scores of 6-8 were found to benefit more from EVT than those with GCS scores of 3-5. The initial GCS score was an independent predictive factor for prognosis in comatose patients.

Coma and Brain Death

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This article discusses the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to patients who are comatose and reviews the current knowledge on prognosis from various causes of coma. This article also provides an overview of the principles for determination of brain death as well as advice on how to avoid common pitfalls.

RECENT FINDINGS

Technologic advances have refined our understanding of the physiology of consciousness and the spectrum of disorders of consciousness; they also promise to improve our prognostic accuracy. Yet the clinical principles for the evaluation and treatment of coma remain unaltered. The clinical standards for determination of death by neurologic criteria (ie, brain death) are also well established, although variabilities in local protocols and legal requirements remain a problem to be resolved.

SUMMARY

Effective evaluation of coma demands a systematic approach relying on clinical information to ensure rational use of laboratory and imaging tests. When the cause of coma is deemed irreversible in the setting of a catastrophic brain injury and no clinical evidence exists for brain and brainstem function, patients should be evaluated for the possibility of brain death by following the clinical criteria specified in the American Academy of Neurology guidelines.