OBJECTIVE: To assess the ability of clinical examination, biomarkers, electrophysiology and brain imaging, individually or in combination to predict good neurological outcomes at 6 months after CA.
METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of the Korean Hypothermia Network Prospective Registry 1.0, which included adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA) patients (≥18 years). Good outcome predictors were defined as both pupillary light reflex (PLR) and corneal reflex (CR) at admission, Glasgow Coma Scale Motor score (GCS-M) >3 at admission, neuron-specific enolase (NSE) <17 µg/L at 24-72 h, a median nerve somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) N20/P25 amplitude >4 µV, continuous background without discharges on electroencephalogram (EEG), and absence of anoxic injury on brain CT and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI).
RESULTS: A total of 1327 subjects were included in the final analysis, and their median age was 59 years; among them, 412 subjects had a good neurological outcome at 6 months. GCS-M >3 at admission had the highest specificity of 96.7% (95% CI 95.3-97.8), and normal brain DWI had the highest sensitivity of 96.3% (95% CI 92.9-98.4). When the two predictors were combined, the sensitivities tended to decrease (ranging from 2.7-81.1%), and the specificities tended to increase, ranging from81.3-100%. Through the explorative variation of the 2021 European Resuscitation Council (ERC) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) prognostication strategy algorithms, good outcomes were predicted, with a specificity of 83.2% and a sensitivity of 83.5% in patients by the algorithm.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinical examination, biomarker, electrophysiology, and brain imaging predicted good outcomes at 6 months after CA. When the two predictors were combined, the specificity further improved. With the 2021 ERC/ESICM guidelines, the number of indeterminate patients and the uncertainty of prognostication can be reduced by using a good outcome prediction algorithm.

To assess the performance of the post-cardiac arrest (CA) prognostication strategy algorithm recommended by the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM) in 2020.
This was a retrospective analysis of the Korean Hypothermia Network Prospective Registry 1.0. Unconscious patients without confounders at day 4 (72-96 h) after return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) were included. The association between the prognostic factors included in the prognostication strategy algorithm, except status myoclonus and the neurological outcome, was investigated, and finally, the prognostic performance of the prognostication strategy algorithm was evaluated. Poor outcome was defined as cerebral performance categories 3-5 at 6 months after ROSC.
A total of 660 patients were included in the final analysis. Of those, 108 (16.4%) patients had a good neurological outcome at 6 months after CA. The 2020 ERC/ESICM prognostication strategy algorithm identified patients with poor neurological outcome with 60.2% sensitivity (95% CI 55.9-64.4) and 100% specificity (95% CI 93.9-100) among patients who were unconscious or had a GCS_M score ≤ 3 and with 58.2% sensitivity (95% CI 53.9-62.3) and 100% specificity (95% CI 96.6-100) among unconscious patients. When two prognostic factors were combined, any combination of prognostic factors had a false positive rate (FPR) of 0 (95% CI 0-5.6 for combination of no PR/CR and poor CT, 0-30.8 for combination of No SSEP N20 and NSE 60).
The 2020 ERC/ESICM prognostication strategy algorithm predicted poor outcome without an FPR and with sensitivities of 58.2-60.2%. Any combinations of two predictors recommended by ERC/ESICM showed 0% of FPR.

To assess the performance of a 4-step algorithm for neurological prognostication after cardiac arrest recommended by the European Resuscitation Council (ERC) and the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine (ESICM).
Retrospective descriptive analysis with data from the Target Temperature Management (TTM) Trial. Associations between predicted and actual neurological outcome were investigated for each step of the algorithm with results from clinical neurological examinations, neuroradiology (CT or MRI), neurophysiology (EEG and SSEP) and serum neuron-specific enolase. Patients examined with Glasgow Coma Scale Motor Score (GCS-M) on day 4 (72-96 h) post-arrest and available 6-month outcome were included. Poor outcome was defined as Cerebral Performance Category 3-5. Variations of the ERC/ESICM algorithm were explored within the same cohort.
The ERC/ESICM algorithm identified poor outcome patients with 38.7% sensitivity (95% CI 33.1-44.7) and 100% specificity (95% CI 98.8-100) in a cohort of 585 patients. An alternative cut-off for serum neuron-specific enolase, an alternative EEG-classification and variations of the GCS-M had minor effects on the sensitivity without causing false positive predictions. The highest overall sensitivity, 42.5% (95% CI 36.7-48.5), was achieved when prognosticating patients irrespective of GCS-M score, with 100% specificity (95% CI 98.8-100) remaining.
The ERC/ESICM algorithm and all exploratory multimodal variations thereof investigated in this study predicted poor outcome without false positive predictions and with sensitivities 34.6-42.5%. Our results should be validated prospectively, preferably in patients where withdrawal of life-sustaining therapy is uncommon to exclude any confounding from self-fulfilling prophecies.