We have located links that may give you full text access.
JOURNAL ARTICLE
REVIEW
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Systematic review of prediction of poor outcome in anoxic-ischaemic coma with biochemical markers of brain damage.
Intensive Care Medicine 2001 October
OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether accurate prognostic rules can be derived from the combined results of studies concerning prediction of poor prognosis in anoxic-ischaemic coma with biochemical markers of brain damage in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) or serum.
DESIGN: A meta-analysis of prognostic studies in anoxic-ischaemic coma, selected from Medline and EMBASE databases, according to predefined criteria.
SUBJECTS: Twenty-eight studies, with a total of 802 unselected, consecutive patients, in which tests, sampling time and outcome measures were described unequivocally and results were described using clear cut-off values or raw data.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Poor outcome, defined as death or vegetative state, versus good outcome, defined as any other outcome state.
ANALYSES: The overall prognostic accuracy of these variables was expressed as the 95% CIs of the pooled false-positive test rate and the pooled positive-likelihood ratios.
RESULTS: Only markers in CSF (creatine kinase isoenzyme (CKBB) >204 U/l, neuron specific enolase (NSE) >33 ng/ml, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) >82 U/l and glutamate oxaloacetate (GOT) >62 U/l) reached a 0% false-positive rate. However, due to small sample sizes, the confidence limits were wide. The accuracy of prediction of poor outcome seemed acceptably high for CSF-CKBB (pooled false-positive rate 0% [95% CI 0-2.3%]; pooled positive-likelihood ratio 33.2 [95% CI 4.8-230.2]), but this result was based on two retrospective studies without blinding of the treating physicians for the test result.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of small numbers of patients studied and methodological limitations the combined results are not sufficiently accurate to provide a solid basis for non-treatment decisions.
DESIGN: A meta-analysis of prognostic studies in anoxic-ischaemic coma, selected from Medline and EMBASE databases, according to predefined criteria.
SUBJECTS: Twenty-eight studies, with a total of 802 unselected, consecutive patients, in which tests, sampling time and outcome measures were described unequivocally and results were described using clear cut-off values or raw data.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Poor outcome, defined as death or vegetative state, versus good outcome, defined as any other outcome state.
ANALYSES: The overall prognostic accuracy of these variables was expressed as the 95% CIs of the pooled false-positive test rate and the pooled positive-likelihood ratios.
RESULTS: Only markers in CSF (creatine kinase isoenzyme (CKBB) >204 U/l, neuron specific enolase (NSE) >33 ng/ml, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) >82 U/l and glutamate oxaloacetate (GOT) >62 U/l) reached a 0% false-positive rate. However, due to small sample sizes, the confidence limits were wide. The accuracy of prediction of poor outcome seemed acceptably high for CSF-CKBB (pooled false-positive rate 0% [95% CI 0-2.3%]; pooled positive-likelihood ratio 33.2 [95% CI 4.8-230.2]), but this result was based on two retrospective studies without blinding of the treating physicians for the test result.
CONCLUSIONS: Because of small numbers of patients studied and methodological limitations the combined results are not sufficiently accurate to provide a solid basis for non-treatment decisions.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app