Coma Prognostication After Acute Brain Injury: A Review.

IMPORTANCE

Among the most impactful neurologic assessments is that of neuroprognostication, defined here as the prediction of neurologic recovery from disorders of consciousness caused by severe, acute brain injury. Across a range of brain injury etiologies, these determinations often dictate whether life-sustaining treatment is continued or withdrawn; thus, they have major implications for morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. Neuroprognostication relies on a diverse array of tests, including behavioral, radiologic, physiological, and serologic markers, that evaluate the brain's functional and structural integrity.

OBSERVATIONS

Prognostic markers, such as the neurologic examination, electroencephalography, and conventional computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have been foundational in assessing a patient's current level of consciousness and capacity for recovery. Emerging techniques, such as functional MRI, diffusion MRI, and advanced forms of electroencephalography, provide new ways of evaluating the brain, leading to evolving schemes for characterizing neurologic function and novel methods for predicting recovery.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Neuroprognostic markers are rapidly evolving as new ways of assessing the brain's structural and functional integrity after brain injury are discovered. Many of these techniques remain in development, and further research is needed to optimize their prognostic utility. However, even as such efforts are underway, a series of promising findings coupled with the imperfect predictive value of conventional prognostic markers and the high stakes of these assessments have prompted clinical guidelines to endorse emerging techniques for neuroprognostication. Thus, clinicians have been thrust into an uncertain predicament in which emerging techniques are not yet perfected but too promising to ignore. This review illustrates the current, and likely future, landscapes of prognostic markers. No matter how much prognostic markers evolve and improve, these assessments must be approached with humility and individualized to reflect each patient's values.