Cardiac arrest & resuscitation
Heart rate variability for neuro-prognostication after cardiac arrest (CA): Insight from the Parisian registry
Authors' conclusion
In comatose patients after CA, some HRV markers appear to be associated with unfavorable outcome, EEG severity and PLR abolition, although the sensitivity of these HRV markers remains limited.
Study context
- Population
- Comatose patients after cardiac arrest who underwent EEG, 2007–202173% unfavorable outcome
- Participants
- 199 patients
- Exposure
- Good vs poor neurological outcome
- Outcome
- Prognostic value of HRV parameters for neurological outcome (unfavorable = best CPC 3-4-5)
- Follow-up
- 3 months
Methodological detailssingle-centre
- Single-centre
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
HRV indices, good vs poor outcome
| Group | VLF | LF | LF/HF ratio | SD2 | DFA α1 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Good outcome | 0.21 ms2/Hz | 0.07 ms2/Hz | 2.01 | 15.1 | 1.03 |
| Poor outcome | 0.09 ms2/Hz | 0.04 ms2/Hz | 1.01 | 10.2 | 0.78 |
VLF
Good outcome0.21 ms2/Hz
Poor outcome0.09 ms2/Hz
LF
Good outcome0.07 ms2/Hz
Poor outcome0.04 ms2/Hz
LF/HF ratio
Good outcome2.01
Poor outcome1.01
SD2
Good outcome15.1
Poor outcome10.2
DFA α1
Good outcome1.03
Poor outcome0.78
- Good outcome vs Poor outcome: P < 0.01 — VLF
- Good outcome vs Poor outcome: P = 0.003 — LF
- Good outcome vs Poor outcome: P = 0.008 — LF/HF ratio
- Good outcome vs Poor outcome: P = 0.016 — SD2
- Good outcome vs Poor outcome: P = 0.002 — DFA α1
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
Heart rate variability (HRV) indices by EEG severity and pupillary light reflex abolition
- Indices differed by EEG pattern severity and pupillary light reflex abolition
Original publication
Heart rate variability for neuro-prognostication after CA: Insight from the Parisian registry. Resuscitation. Published 24 June 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →