↓ Skip to main content

Early impairment of intracranial conduction time predicts mortality in deeply sedated critically ill patients: a prospective observational pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Intensive Care, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (63rd percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
44 Mendeley
Title
Early impairment of intracranial conduction time predicts mortality in deeply sedated critically ill patients: a prospective observational pilot study
Published in
Annals of Intensive Care, June 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13613-017-0290-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Eric Azabou, Benjamin Rohaut, Nicholas Heming, Eric Magalhaes, Régine Morizot-Koutlidis, Stanislas Kandelman, Jeremy Allary, Guy Moneger, Andrea Polito, Virginie Maxime, Djillali Annane, Frederic Lofaso, Fabrice Chrétien, Jean Mantz, Raphael Porcher, Tarek Sharshar

Abstract

Somatosensory (SSEP) and brainstem auditory (BAEP) evoked potentials are neurophysiological tools which, respectively, explore the intracranial conduction time (ICCT) and the intrapontine conduction time (IPCT). The prognostic values of prolonged cerebral conduction times in deeply sedated patients have never been assessed. Sedated patients are at risk of developing new neurological complications, undetected. In this prospective observational bi-center pilot study, we investigated whether early impairment of SSEP's ICCT and/or BAEP's IPCT could predict in-ICU mortality or altered mental status (AMS), in deeply sedated critically ill patients. SSEP by stimulation of the median nerve and BAEP were assessed in critically ill patients receiving deep sedation on day 3 following ICU admission. Deep sedation was defined by a Richmond Assessment sedation Scale (RASS) <-3. Mean left- and right-side ICCT and IPCT were measured for each patient. Primary and secondary outcomes were, respectively, in-ICU mortality and AMS defined as the occurrence of delirium and/or delayed awakening after discontinuation of sedation. Eighty-six patients were studied of which 49 (57%) were non-brain-injured and 37 (43%) were brain-injured. Impaired ICCT was a predictor of in-ICU mortality after adjustment on the global Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (SOFA) [OR (95% CI) = 2.69 (1.05-6.85); p = 0.039] and on the non-neurological SOFA components [2.67 (1.05-6.81); p = 0.040]. IPCT was more frequently delayed in the subgroup of patients who developed post-sedation AMS (24%) compared those without AMS (0%). However, this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.053). Impairment rates of ICCT and IPCT were not found to be significantly different between non-brain- and brain-injured subgroups of patients. In critically ill patients receiving deep sedation, early ICCT impairment was associated with mortality. Somatosensory and brainstem auditory evoked potentials may be useful early warning indicators of brain dysfunction as well as prognostic markers in deeply sedated critically ill patients.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 44 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 18%
Researcher 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 8 18%
Unknown 13 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 16 36%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 9%
Neuroscience 4 9%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 12 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2018.
All research outputs
#7,020,339
of 22,979,862 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Intensive Care
#624
of 1,051 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#111,937
of 317,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Intensive Care
#15
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,979,862 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,051 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 16.8. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.