Cited by 48Congenital Heart Disease StudiesNeonatal and fetal brain pathologyCardiovascular Conditions and Treatments

Association Between Electroencephalographic Findings and Neurologic Status in Infants With Congenital Heart Defects

Limperopoulos, Catherine, Majnemer, Annette, Rosenblatt, Bernard, Shevell, Michael I., Rohlicek, Charles, Tchervenkov, Christo, Gottesman, Ronald·2001·Journal of Child Neurology

Abstract

Neurologic status is of concern in infants with congenital heart defects undergoing open heart surgery. The association between perioperative electroencephalography (EEG) with acute neurologic status and subsequent outcome was examined in a cohort of 60 infants. Preoperative EEG and neurologic examinations were performed within 1 to 2 days prior to surgery (n = 27) and postoperatively (n = 47). Prior to surgery, 15 of 27 infants had normal EEG, whereas 5 had epileptiform activity and 9 had disturbances in background activity that were primarily moderate (8/9) and diffuse (7/9). Postoperatively, only 17 of 47 infants had normal recordings. Newborns (<1 month) were more likely (P < .001) to demonstrate EEG abnormalities than infants. Epileptiform activity was documented in 15, whereas 28 had background abnormalities that were moderate-severe (22/28) and diffuse (20/28) in most. Epileptiform activity prior to surgery was always associated with an abnormal neurologic examination, and this association persisted postoperatively (86%). Moderate to severe background abnormalities in the postoperative EEG was also strongly associated with acute neurologic abnormalities (93%). Severe background abnormalities (n = 5) were 100% predictive of death or severe disability. Long-term follow-up revealed that all children with normal postoperative EEGs had positive neurologic outcomes (P = .04); however, there were many false positives. Perioperative EEG abnormalities increased the likelihood for acute neurologic findings, whereas normal recordings following surgery were reassuring with regard to a favorable outcome. (J Child Neurol 2001;16:471-476).

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/088307380101600702

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Limperopoulos, C., Majnemer, A., Rosenblatt, B., Shevell, M. I., Rohlicek, C., Tchervenkov, C., & Gottesman, R.
Affiliations
Montreal Children's Hospital (CA)
Venue
Journal of Child Neurology
Published
2001-07
Volume
16
Issue
7
Pages
471-476
ISSN
  • 0883-0738 (ISSN-L)
  • 1708-8283
OpenAlex
W2051221006
Cited by
48
References
41
Citations by year
2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2 · 2013: 3
FWCI
0.25
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Child Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Congenital Heart Disease Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Neonatal and fetal brain pathology
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging › Cardiovascular Conditions and Treatments
Keywords
congenital heart disease, infants, neurological outcome, epileptiform activity, EEG background abnormalities, cardiac surgery, neonates
MeSH terms
Electroencephalography, Epilepsy, Female, Heart Defects, Congenital, Humans, Infant, Newborn, Male, Predictive Value of Tests, Severity of Illness Index, Cardiovascular Surgical Procedures, Cohort Studies, Children with Disabilities, Disabled Children

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review