You better hope your hospital implements this new one if it hasn't done anything with this 6 year old one.
An article describing it here;
Brain Shaking Technique - strong magnetic stimulation - Offers Measure of Consciousness
The latest here:
‘It’s Gigantic’: A New Way to Gauge the Chances for Unresponsive Patients
Researchers have found a way to detect “covert consciousness” that could aid the recovery of people with severe brain injuries.
Doctors have
known for years that some patients who become unresponsive after a
severe brain injury nonetheless retain a “covert consciousness,” a
degree of cognitive function that is important to recovery but is not
detectable by standard bedside exams. As a result, a profound
uncertainty often haunts the wrenching decisions that families must make
when an unresponsive loved one needs life support, an uncertainty that
also amplifies national debates over how to determine when a patient in
this condition can be declared beyond help.
Now,
scientists report the first large-scale demonstration of an approach
that can identify this hidden brain function right after injury, using
specialized computer analysis of routine EEG recordings from the skull.
The new study, published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine,
found that 15 percent of otherwise unresponsive patients in one
intensive care unit had covert brain activity in the days after injury.
Moreover, these patients were nearly four times more likely to achieve
partial independence over the next year with rehabilitation, compared to
patients with no activity.
The EEG
approach will not be widely available for some time, due in part to the
technical expertise required, which most I.C.U.’s don’t yet have. And
doctors said the test would not likely resolve the kind of high-profile
cases that have taken on religious and political dimensions, like that
of Terri Schiavo, the Florida woman whose condition touched off an
ethical debate in the mid-2000s, or Karen Ann Quinlan, a New Jersey
woman whose case stirred similar sentiments in the 1970s. Those debates
centered less on recovery than on the definition of life and the right
to die; the new analysis presumes some resting level of EEG, and that signal in both women was virtually flat.
But
the EEG approach, once tested more broadly and refined, will likely
change standard practice, some experts said, helping guide treatment
decisions in the excruciating first days and weeks after a brain injury.
“This is very big for the field,” said Dr. Nicholas Schiff,
a professor of neurology and neuroscience at Weill Cornell Medical
College in New York. “The understanding that, as the brain recovers, one
in seven people could be conscious and aware, very much aware, of
what’s being said about them, and that this applies every day, in every
I.C.U. — it’s gigantic.” The finding, he added, “should change practice
requirements around the world.”
[Like the Science Times page on Facebook. | Sign up for the Science Times newsletter.]
Other
doctors said it was still too early to predict the impact of the new
technique. “This approach is not ready to be incorporated into standard
practice at this time, as we are just not able to reliably predict
outcomes early after injury,” said Dr. Flora Hammond, chair of physical
medicine and rehabilitation at Indiana University School of Medicine.
In
the new analysis, researchers at Columbia University and New York
University tracked 104 unresponsive patients in Columbia’s neurological
I.C.U., taking EEG recordings from each in the first few days after
injury. The brain injuries had a variety of causes, including blows to
the head, heart attack and internal bleeding. During each EEG recording,
the researchers gave the patients instructions through headphones,
including, “Begin opening and closing your right hand,” and “Stop
opening and closing your right hand.”
The
researchers fed the EEG data into a machine-learning algorithm, which
compared the brain activity following each command to resting-state
activity, looking for distinct and consistent differences — the chatter
of motor signals, filtered from the background noise. And in 16
patients, hidden activity became evident. Previous research, in patients
who had been unresponsive for years, had found that a subset showed
hidden brain function. The new study is the first to use this approach
to examine a large number of patients just after the injury.
“Somewhat
to our surprise, we found that about 15 percent of patients who were
not responding at all had this brain activation in response to the
commands,” said Dr. Jan Claassen, medical director of the neurological
I.C.U. at Columbia and the lead author of the paper. “It suggests that
there’s some remnant of consciousness there. However, we don’t know if
the patients really understood what we were saying. We only know the
brain reacted.”
The
researchers tracked the progress of all of the patients for a year
following injury. Patients in both groups showed real improvement, but
those with the hidden brain activation had a better prognosis overall,
the study found. After a year, seven of the 16 patients with covert
activity had recovered to the point where they could function without
help for at least eight hours. By contrast, 12 of the other 88 had reached that level of recovery.
The
research team will need to study more patients, for longer, to better
understand the relationship of EEG activity to eventual outcome and to
the underlying biology of the injury, Dr. Claassen said.
But
for now, many neurologists believe that the field is on the verge of
gaining useful insight into the mute, immobile but very human patients
in their care. “This approach is not perfect; there are false-negative
results, and false-positive ones,” said Dr. Brian Edlow, associate
director of Massachusetts General Hospital’s Center for Neurotechnology
and Neurorecovery. “But this study suggests that there are compelling
reasons to acquire these types of data. And it’s not hard to imagine a
future where I.C.U.’s routinely get these data and send them off for
analysis.”
No comments:
Post a Comment