Evidence Hub

Temporal evolution of electrographic seizures in newborn infants with hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy requiring therapeutic hypothermia: a secondary analysis of the ANSeR studies

Andreea M. Pavel, J. Rennie, L. D. de Vries, S. Mathieson, V. Livingstone, M. Finder, Adrienne Foran, D. Shah et al.

The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 2024

263 participants · 21 citations

Abstract

Summary Background Despite extensive research on neonatal hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy, detailed information about electrographic seizures during active cooling and rewarming of therapeutic hypothermia is sparse. We aimed to describe temporal evolution of seizures and determine whether there is a correlation of seizure evolution with 2-year outcome. Methods This secondary analysis included newborn infants recruited from eight European tertiary neonatal intensive care units for two multicentre studies (a randomised controlled trial [NCT02431780] and an observational study [NCT02160171]). Infants were born at 36+0 weeks of gestation with moderate or severe hypoxic-ischaemic encephalopathy and underwent therapeutic hypothermia with prolonged conventional video-electroencephalography (EEG) monitoring for 10 h or longer from the start of rewarming. Seizure burden characteristics were calculated based on electrographic seizures annotations: hourly seizure burden (minutes of seizures within an hour) and total seizure burden (minutes of seizures within the entire recording). We categorised infants into those with electrographic seizures during active cooling only, those with electrographic seizures during cooling and rewarming, and those without seizures. Neurodevelopmental outcomes were determined using the Bayley's Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (BSID-III), the Griffiths Mental Development Scales (GMDS), or neurological assessment. An abnormal outcome…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 263 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free