Bayesian Outcome Prediction After Resuscitation From Cardiac Arrest. (13th September 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Elmer, Jonathan; Coppler, Patrick J.; Jones, Bobby L.; Nagin, Daniel S.; Callaway, Clifton W.
• Is Part Of: Neurology. Volume 99:Number 11(2022)
• Page Start: e1113
• Page End: e1121
• Publication Date: 2022-09-13
• Subjects: Neurology -- Periodicals; Neurology -- Periodicals; Neurologie -- Périodiques; 616.8
• DOI: 10.1212/WNL.0000000000200854
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0028-3878

Abstract

Abstract : Background and Objectives: Postarrest prognostication research does not typically account for the sequential nature of real-life data acquisition and interpretation and reports nonintuitive estimates of uncertainty. Bayesian approaches offer advantages well suited to prognostication. We used Bayesian regression to explore the usefulness of sequential prognostic indicators in the context of prior knowledge and compared this with a guideline-concordant algorithm. Methods: We included patients hospitalized at a single center after cardiac arrest. We extracted prospective data and assumed these data accrued over time as in routine practice. We considered predictors demographic and arrest characteristics, initial and daily neurologic examination, laboratory results, therapeutic interventions, brain imaging, and EEG. We fit Bayesian hierarchical generalized linear multivariate models predicting discharge Cerebral Performance Category (CPC) 4 or 5 (poor outcomes) vs 1–3 including sequential clinical and prognostic data. We explored outcome posterior probability distributions (PPDs) for individual patients and overall. As a comparator, we applied the 2021 European Resuscitation Council and European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ERC/ESICM) guidelines. Results: We included 2, 692 patients of whom 864 (35%) were discharged with a CPC 1–3. Patients' outcome PPDs became narrow and shifted toward 0 or 1 as sequentially acquired information was added to models. These changes were largest after arrest characteristics and initial neurologic examination were included. Using information typically available at or before intensive care unit admission, sensitivity predicting poor outcome was 51% with a 0.6% false-positive rate. In our most comprehensive model, sensitivity for poor outcome prediction was 76% with 0.6% false-positive rate (FPR). The ERC/ESICM algorithm applied to 547 of 2, 692 patients and yielded 36% sensitivity with 0% FPR. Discussion: Bayesian models offer advantages well suited to prognostication research. On balance, our findings support the view that in expert hands, accurate neurologic prognostication is possible in many cases before 72 hours postarrest. Although we caution against early withdrawal of life-sustaining therapies, rapid outcome prediction can inform clinical decision making and future clinical trials.