EEG With Periodic AbnormalitiesCERTANCT03129438
Continuous EEG Randomized Trial in Adults
A study testing continuous EEG (cEEG) and routine EEG (rEEG) in people with EEG With Periodic Abnormalities and EEG With Abnormally Slow Frequencies, run by Andrea Rossetti, MD at 4 sites in Switzerland.
Trial summary
Continuous video-EEG monitoring (cEEG) significantly improves seizure or status epilepticus detection in patients in intensive care units (ICUs), and is recommended for patients with consciousness impairment. cEEG is time- and resource consuming as compared to routine EEG (rEEG, lasting 20-30 minutes). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- EEG With Periodic Abnormalities, EEG With Abnormally Slow Frequencies, Coma
- What is being tested?
- continuous EEG (cEEG) and routine EEG (rEEG)
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 404 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesSwitzerland
- Study dates
- 25 Apr 2017to 13 May 2019
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- In-patients aged ≥18 years, treated in an ICU or intermediate care unit
- Alteration of mental state of any etiology (i.e., primarily cerebral or not), with Glasgow-coma scale inferior or equal to 11 or FOUR score inferior or equal to 12.
- Need of an EEG to exclude seizures or SE, or to evaluate prognosis as per the treating physician or the consulting neurologist.
- Informed consent obtained for research in emergency situation according to Human Research Act (HRA) art 30-31 at the time of inclusion
Who cannot join
- Clinical and/or electrographic status epilepticus < 96h before randomization
- Clinical and/or electrographic seizure < 36h before randomization
- Palliative care situation, in which detection of SE or seizures would not have any impact on the patient's care.
- High likelihood of needing a surgical intervention or an invasive diagnostic procedure within the next 48 hours according to the treating physician (as this would require cEEG removal).
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 1 country.
Switzerland4 sites
Universitätsspital
Basel, 4031
Inselspital
Bern, 3010
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV)
Lausanne, Canton of Vaud, 1011
Hôpital du Valais - Site Hôpital de Sion
Sion, Valais, 1951
About this study
Official title: Impact on Clinical Outcome of Continuous Video-electroencephalography (cEEG) Monitoring in Patients With Disorders of Consciousness: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Continuous video-EEG monitoring (cEEG) significantly improves seizure or status epilepticus detection in patients in intensive care units (ICUs), and is recommended for patients with consciousness impairment. cEEG is time- and resource consuming as compared to routine EEG (rEEG, lasting 20-30 minutes). While centers in North America have been using it increasingly, most European hospitals still do not have resources to comply with these guidelines. In addition, only one population-based study based on discharge diagnoses suggested that cEEG may improve patients' outcome. Current guidelines are thus based upon weak evidence and expert opinions.
Aim of the study is to assess if cEEG in adults with consciousness impairment is related to an improvement of functional outcome, and to address the prognostic role of quantitative network EEG analyses.
In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, adults with GCS inferior or equal to 11 or FOUR score inferior or equal to 12 will be randomized 1:1 to cEEG for 30-48 hours or two rEEG within 48 hours. The primary outcome will be mortality at 6 months. Secondary outcomes will blindly assess functional outcome, seizure/status epilepticus detection rate, duration of ICU stay, change in patient management (antiepileptic drug introduced, increased, or stopped, brain imaging), and reimbursement. Additionally, quantitative EEG will be assessed towards the primary outcome. 350 patients are planned to be included.
Read the detailed description
Background: Continuous video-EEG monitoring (cEEG) is a non-invasive tool to monitor the electrical brain function; it significantly improves seizure or status epilepticus detection in comatose patients in intensive care units (ICUs), which often do not show any specific clinical correlates. Recently, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine published guidelines regarding the use of cEEG in the ICUs, recommending it for most patients with consciousness disorders. cEEG is time- and resource consuming as compared to routine spot EEG (rEEG, typically lasting 20-30 minutes). While centers in North America have been using it increasingly, most European - and all Swiss - hospitals still do not have enough resources to comply with these guidelines. In addition, while the superiority of cEEG to detect non-convulsive seizures or status epilepticus is proven, only one population-based study based on discharge diagnoses suggested that cEEG may improve patients' outcome. Current guidelines are thus based upon weak evidence and expert opinions. If cEEG leads to improved patients' care remains elusive. Moreover, little attention has been drawn towards quantitative EEG information beyond visual analysis, and the impact of such information on diagnosis, treatment, and outcome remains unclear.
Aim: To assess whether the use of cEEG in patients with consciousness impairment is related to an improvement of functional outcome, and to address the prognostic role of quantitative network EEG analyses in this cohort. Also, a cost analysis will be performed.
Methods: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, adults with a Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) inferior or equal to 11 or a FOUR score inferior or equal to 12, regardless of etiologies, will be randomized 1:1 to cEEG for 30-48 hours or two rEEG within 48 hours, interpreted in a standardized way. Patients with detected seizures in the last 36h or status epilepticus in the last 96h will be excluded, as cEEG may represent the standard of care. Demographics, etiology, Charlson Comorbidity Index, GCS, diagnosis leading to EEG, mechanical ventilation, and subsequent use of rEEG/cEEG will be collected. The primary outcome will be mortality at 6 months. Secondary outcomes will blindly assess functional outcome at 4 weeks and 6 months, as well as seizure/status epilepticus detection rate and time to detection, infections rate, duration of ICU stay, change in patient management (antiepileptic drug introduced, increased, or stopped, brain imaging), and reimbursement. Analyses will compare the two interventional groups (intention to diagnose) regarding outcome, as a whole and stratified according to etiological subgroups, and other variables of interest. Additionally, lope cross correlation and horizontal visibility graphs will be applied to compute a weighted adjacency matrix consisting of all the pairwise interdependences between EEG signals, in order to characterize the integrative and segregative characteristics of the underlying functional brain networks and compare their relationship with the primary outcome. According to a previous estimate, patients with consciousness disorders undergoing cEEG have a 75% survival rate; while patients w/o cEEG 61%. Using a power of 0.8, an α error of 0.05, and a 2-side approach, 2x174 patients would be needed to detect this significant difference in survival.
Expected impact: This study will clarify if cEEG monitoring has a significant impact on functional outcome and define its cost effectiveness, and if network EEG analysis has a role in outcome prognostication. The results of this study will have a considerable potential to influence clinical practice regarding EEG and treatment of patients with altered levels of consciousness. If results will indicate that cEEG contributes to improve outcome, this will lead to the urgent need for implementation of cEEG with consecutive substantial impact on health care and resource allocation in larger Swiss and European hospitals.
- Conditions
- EEG With Periodic Abnormalities, EEG With Abnormally Slow Frequencies, Coma, Outcome, Fatal
- Being tested
- continuous EEG (cEEG), routine EEG (rEEG)
- Keywords
- continuous EEG, routine EEG, prognosis
- Medical subject headings
- Coma
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
continuous EEG (cEEG)Diagnostic test
differential use of continuous versus routine EEG
routine EEG (rEEG)Diagnostic test
differential use of continuous versus routine EEG
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| continuous EEG (cEEG) | Experimental | Patients randomized to continuous EEG will be recorded with at least 21 electrodes placed according to the international 10-20 system; occasionally, a reduced montage will be allowed in patients with extensive neurosurgical scars, according to good common practice. Recordings will last a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 48 hours. During this time, one interruption to a maximum of two hours for diagnostic purposes will be allowed. Reactivity testing using auditory and nociceptive stimuli will be performed at least twice during the recording time. Recordings will be visually interpreted by certified electroencephalographers (i.e., interpretation of the automated algorithm only won't be allowed) using the 2013 American Clinical neurophysiology nomenclature; interpretations will be communicated within two hours of their completion to the treating team. Receives: Diagnostic Test: continuous EEG (cEEG) |
| routine EEG (rEEG) | Active comparator | Patients randomized to routine EEG will be recorded with at least 21 electrodes placed according to the international 10-20 system; occasionally, a reduced montage will be allowed in patients with extensive neurosurgical scars, according to good common practice. Recordings will last between 20 and 30 minutes; two recordings will take place over a period of 24 to 48 hours. Reactivity testing using auditory and nociceptive stimuli will be performed once per recording. Recordings will be visually interpreted by certified electroencephalographers using the 2013 American Clinical neurophysiology nomenclature, as for the experimental intervention, and the interpretation will be communicated within two hours of its completion to the treating team. Receives: Diagnostic Test: routine EEG (rEEG) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Mortality
Fatality rate
Measured: 6 months
Secondary outcomes (17)
Functional outcome 1
Functional outcome using the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) (ordinal)
Measured: 4 weeks, 6 months
Functional outcome 2
Functional outcome using the Cerebral Performance Categories (CPC) (ordinal)
Measured: 4 weeks, 6 months
Work/School
Assessment of ability to go back to work/school if previously working/at school (proportion)
Measured: 4 weeks, 6 months
Seizure detection rate
Seizure detection rate (proportion)
Measured: within 60 hours
Status Epilepticus detection rate
Status Epilepticus detection rate (proportion)
Measured: within 60 hours
Time to detection of seizure
Time to detection of seizure after the start of EEG recording (continuous variable)
Measured: within 60 hours
Time to detection of status epilepticus
Time to detection of status epilepticus after the start of EEG recording (continuous variable)
Measured: within 60 hours
Presence of clinical signs of seizures
Presence of clinical signs of seizures (continuous variable)
Measured: within 60 hours
Detection of interictal epileptiform features
Detection of interictal epileptiform features (categorical)
Measured: within 60 hours
Rate of Infections
Rate of in-hospital infections requiring antibiotic treatment at 4 weeks after first EEG (proportion)
Measured: 4 weeks
Need of mechanical ventilation
Need of mechanical ventilation after first EEG (proportion variable)
Measured: 4 weeks
Duration of mechanical ventilation
Duration of mechanical ventilation after first EEG (continuous variable)
Measured: 4 weeks
Duration of ICU and hospital stay
Duration of ICU and hospital stay (continuous variable)
Measured: 4 weeks, 6 months
Patient destination
Patient destination after acute facility (home, rehab, nursing home, other; categorical)
Measured: 4 weeks, 6 months
Change in clinical patients' management
Change in clinical patient management (i.e., antiepileptic drugs (AED) introduced or stopped, AED increased or decreased, brain imaging procedure order) occurring during the 60 hours following the start of the first EEG (categorical).
Measured: 60 hours
Correlation between quantitative EEG and primary outcome
Correlation between quantitative EEG and primary outcome
Measured: 6 months
Hospitalization costs
Global hospitalization costs intended as amount billed for each patient's acute hospital stay, assessed through the billing department of each hospital (continuous variable - stratified by site)
Measured: 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted26 Apr 2017
- Study start25 Apr 2017
- Primary completion13 May 2019
- Study completion13 May 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (5)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for EEG With Periodic AbnormalitiesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 404 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Andrea Rossetti, MD
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Andrea Rossetti, MD, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois
- Investigators
- Andrea O Rossetti, MD, Principal investigator, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03129438
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2017_00268
- Other IDs
- 2017
- Acronym
- CERTA
- Status last verified
- Jul 2019
- First submitted
- 17 Apr 2017
- Last updated
- 25 Jul 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Urbano V, Alvarez V, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Ben-Hamouda N, Novy J, Rossetti AO. Continuous versus routine EEG in patients after cardiac arrest: Analysis of a randomized controlled trial (CERTA). Resuscitation. 2022 Jul;176:68-73. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2022.05.017. Epub 2022 May 30.
PubMed 35654226Urbano V, Novy J, Alvarez V, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Rossetti AO. EEG recording latency in critically ill patients: Impact on outcome. An analysis of a randomized controlled trial (CERTA). Clin Neurophysiol. 2022 Jul;139:23-27. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2022.04.003. Epub 2022 Apr 18.
PubMed 35490437Urbano V, Novy J, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Alvarez V, Zubler F, Oddo M, Lee JW, Rossetti AO. Continuous versus routine EEG in critically ill adults: reimbursement analysis of a randomised trial. Swiss Med Wkly. 2021 Mar 16;151:w20477. doi: 10.4414/smw.2021.20477. eCollection 2021 Mar 15.
PubMed 33793960Guinchard M, Warpelin-Decrausaz L, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Oddo M, Novy J, Alvarez V, Rossetti AO. Informed consent in critically ill adults participating to a randomized trial. Brain Behav. 2021 Feb;11(2):e01965. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1965. Epub 2020 Dec 3.
PubMed 33271000Rossetti AO, Schindler K, Sutter R, Ruegg S, Zubler F, Novy J, Oddo M, Warpelin-Decrausaz L, Alvarez V. Continuous vs Routine Electroencephalogram in Critically Ill Adults With Altered Consciousness and No Recent Seizure: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2020 Oct 1;77(10):1225-1232. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.2264.
PubMed 32716479
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Jul 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Impact on Clinical Outcome of Continuous Video-electroencephalography (cEEG) Monitoring in Patients With Disorders of Consciousness: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03129438
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CERTA / 2017_00268
- Conditions
- EEG With Periodic Abnormalities, EEG With Abnormally Slow Frequencies, Coma, Outcome, Fatal
- Keywords
- continuous EEG, routine EEG, prognosis
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 404 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Andrea Rossetti, MDUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 25 Apr 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 13 May 2019 (actual)
- Study completion
- 13 May 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 26 Apr 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Continuous video-EEG monitoring (cEEG) significantly improves seizure or status epilepticus detection in patients in intensive care units (ICUs), and is recommended for patients with consciousness impairment. cEEG is time- and resource consuming as compared to routine EEG (rEEG, lasting 20-30 minutes). While centers in North America have been using it increasingly, most European hospitals still do not have resources to comply with these guidelines. In addition, only one population-based study based on discharge diagnoses suggested that cEEG may improve patients' outcome. Current guidelines are thus based upon weak evidence and expert opinions.
Aim of the study is to assess if cEEG in adults with consciousness impairment is related to an improvement of functional outcome, and to address the prognostic role of quantitative network EEG analyses.
In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, adults with GCS inferior or equal to 11 or FOUR score inferior or equal to 12 will be randomized 1:1 to cEEG for 30-48 hours or two rEEG within 48 hours. The primary outcome will be mortality at 6 months. Secondary outcomes will blindly assess functional outcome, seizure/status epilepticus detection rate, duration of ICU stay, change in patient management (antiepileptic drug introduced, increased, or stopped, brain imaging), and reimbursement. Additionally, quantitative EEG will be assessed towards the primary outcome. 350 patients are planned to be included.
Detailed description
Background: Continuous video-EEG monitoring (cEEG) is a non-invasive tool to monitor the electrical brain function; it significantly improves seizure or status epilepticus detection in comatose patients in intensive care units (ICUs), which often do not show any specific clinical correlates. Recently, the European Society of Intensive Care Medicine published guidelines regarding the use of cEEG in the ICUs, recommending it for most patients with consciousness disorders. cEEG is time- and resource consuming as compared to routine spot EEG (rEEG, typically lasting 20-30 minutes). While centers in North America have been using it increasingly, most European - and all Swiss - hospitals still do not have enough resources to comply with these guidelines. In addition, while the superiority of cEEG to detect non-convulsive seizures or status epilepticus is proven, only one population-based study based on discharge diagnoses suggested that cEEG may improve patients' outcome. Current guidelines are thus based upon weak evidence and expert opinions. If cEEG leads to improved patients' care remains elusive. Moreover, little attention has been drawn towards quantitative EEG information beyond visual analysis, and the impact of such information on diagnosis, treatment, and outcome remains unclear.
Aim: To assess whether the use of cEEG in patients with consciousness impairment is related to an improvement of functional outcome, and to address the prognostic role of quantitative network EEG analyses in this cohort. Also, a cost analysis will be performed.
Methods: In this multicenter randomized controlled trial, adults with a Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) inferior or equal to 11 or a FOUR score inferior or equal to 12, regardless of etiologies, will be randomized 1:1 to cEEG for 30-48 hours or two rEEG within 48 hours, interpreted in a standardized way. Patients with detected seizures in the last 36h or status epilepticus in the last 96h will be excluded, as cEEG may represent the standard of care. Demographics, etiology, Charlson Comorbidity Index, GCS, diagnosis leading to EEG, mechanical ventilation, and subsequent use of rEEG/cEEG will be collected. The primary outcome will be mortality at 6 months. Secondary outcomes will blindly assess functional outcome at 4 weeks and 6 months, as well as seizure/status epilepticus detection rate and time to detection, infections rate, duration of ICU stay, change in patient management (antiepileptic drug introduced, increased, or stopped, brain imaging), and reimbursement. Analyses will compare the two interventional groups (intention to diagnose) regarding outcome, as a whole and stratified according to etiological subgroups, and other variables of interest. Additionally, lope cross correlation and horizontal visibility graphs will be applied to compute a weighted adjacency matrix consisting of all the pairwise interdependences between EEG signals, in order to characterize the integrative and segregative characteristics of the underlying functional brain networks and compare their relationship with the primary outcome. According to a previous estimate, patients with consciousness disorders undergoing cEEG have a 75% survival rate; while patients w/o cEEG 61%. Using a power of 0.8, an α error of 0.05, and a 2-side approach, 2x174 patients would be needed to detect this significant difference in survival.
Expected impact: This study will clarify if cEEG monitoring has a significant impact on functional outcome and define its cost effectiveness, and if network EEG analysis has a role in outcome prognostication. The results of this study will have a considerable potential to influence clinical practice regarding EEG and treatment of patients with altered levels of consciousness. If results will indicate that cEEG contributes to improve outcome, this will lead to the urgent need for implementation of cEEG with consecutive substantial impact on health care and resource allocation in larger Swiss and European hospitals.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| continuous EEG (cEEG) | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: continuous EEG (cEEG)Patients randomized to continuous EEG will be recorded with at least 21 electrodes placed according to the international 10-20 system; occasionally, a reduced montage will be allowed in patients with extensive neurosurgical scars, according to good common practice. Recordings will last a minimum of 30 and a maximum of 48 hours. During this time, one interruption to a maximum of two hours for diagnostic purposes will be allowed. Reactivity testing using auditory and nociceptive stimuli will be performed at least twice during the recording time. Recordings will be visually interpreted by certified electroencephalographers (i.e., interpretation of the automated algorithm only won't be allowed) using the 2013 American Clinical neurophysiology nomenclature; interpretations will be communicated within two hours of their completion to the treating team. |
| routine EEG (rEEG) | Active comparator | Diagnostic Test: routine EEG (rEEG)Patients randomized to routine EEG will be recorded with at least 21 electrodes placed according to the international 10-20 system; occasionally, a reduced montage will be allowed in patients with extensive neurosurgical scars, according to good common practice. Recordings will last between 20 and 30 minutes; two recordings will take place over a period of 24 to 48 hours. Reactivity testing using auditory and nociceptive stimuli will be performed once per recording. Recordings will be visually interpreted by certified electroencephalographers using the 2013 American Clinical neurophysiology nomenclature, as for the experimental intervention, and the interpretation will be communicated within two hours of its completion to the treating team. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- In-patients aged ≥18 years, treated in an ICU or intermediate care unit
- Alteration of mental state of any etiology (i.e., primarily cerebral or not), with Glasgow-coma scale inferior or equal to 11 or FOUR score inferior or equal to 12.
- Need of an EEG to exclude seizures or SE, or to evaluate prognosis as per the treating physician or the consulting neurologist.
- Informed consent obtained for research in emergency situation according to Human Research Act (HRA) art 30-31 at the time of inclusion
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Clinical and/or electrographic status epilepticus < 96h before randomization
- Clinical and/or electrographic seizure < 36h before randomization
- Palliative care situation, in which detection of SE or seizures would not have any impact on the patient's care.
- High likelihood of needing a surgical intervention or an invasive diagnostic procedure within the next 48 hours according to the treating physician (as this would require cEEG removal).
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| continuous EEG (cEEG)differential use of continuous versus routine EEG | Diagnostic test | continuous EEG (cEEG) |
| routine EEG (rEEG)differential use of continuous versus routine EEG | Diagnostic test | routine EEG (rEEG) |
Primary outcome
Mortality
Time frame: 6 months
Fatality rate
17 secondary outcomes
Functional outcome 1
Time frame: 4 weeks, 6 months
Functional outcome 2
Time frame: 4 weeks, 6 months
Work/School
Time frame: 4 weeks, 6 months
Seizure detection rate
Time frame: within 60 hours
Status Epilepticus detection rate
Time frame: within 60 hours
Time to detection of seizure
Time frame: within 60 hours
Time to detection of status epilepticus
Time frame: within 60 hours
Presence of clinical signs of seizures
Time frame: within 60 hours
Detection of interictal epileptiform features
Time frame: within 60 hours
Rate of Infections
Time frame: 4 weeks
Need of mechanical ventilation
Time frame: 4 weeks
Duration of mechanical ventilation
Time frame: 4 weeks
Duration of ICU and hospital stay
Time frame: 4 weeks, 6 months
Patient destination
Time frame: 4 weeks, 6 months
Change in clinical patients' management
Time frame: 60 hours
Correlation between quantitative EEG and primary outcome
Time frame: 6 months
Hospitalization costs
Time frame: 6 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Jul 2019.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35654226Urbano V, Alvarez V, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Ben-Hamouda N, Novy J, Rossetti AO. Continuous versus routine EEG in patients after cardiac arrest: Analysis of a randomized controlled trial (CERTA). Resuscitation. 2022 Jul;176:68-73. doi: 10.1016/j.resuscitation.2022.05.017. Epub 2022 May 30.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35490437Urbano V, Novy J, Alvarez V, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Rossetti AO. EEG recording latency in critically ill patients: Impact on outcome. An analysis of a randomized controlled trial (CERTA). Clin Neurophysiol. 2022 Jul;139:23-27. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2022.04.003. Epub 2022 Apr 18.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33793960Urbano V, Novy J, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Alvarez V, Zubler F, Oddo M, Lee JW, Rossetti AO. Continuous versus routine EEG in critically ill adults: reimbursement analysis of a randomised trial. Swiss Med Wkly. 2021 Mar 16;151:w20477. doi: 10.4414/smw.2021.20477. eCollection 2021 Mar 15.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33271000Guinchard M, Warpelin-Decrausaz L, Schindler K, Ruegg S, Oddo M, Novy J, Alvarez V, Rossetti AO. Informed consent in critically ill adults participating to a randomized trial. Brain Behav. 2021 Feb;11(2):e01965. doi: 10.1002/brb3.1965. Epub 2020 Dec 3.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 32716479Rossetti AO, Schindler K, Sutter R, Ruegg S, Zubler F, Novy J, Oddo M, Warpelin-Decrausaz L, Alvarez V. Continuous vs Routine Electroencephalogram in Critically Ill Adults With Altered Consciousness and No Recent Seizure: A Multicenter Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2020 Oct 1;77(10):1225-1232. doi: 10.1001/jamaneurol.2020.2264.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for EEG With Periodic Abnormalities
RecruitingObservational study
CEReBral AutorEgulation in Non-cardiac SuRgery and Relationship to Postoperative DeliriUm State
Perioperative/Postoperative Complications, Postoperative Cognitive Dysfunction
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Andrea O Rossetti, MD principal investigator
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois
4 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing continuous EEG (cEEG) and routine EEG (rEEG) in people with EEG With Periodic Abnormalities and EEG With Abnormally Slow Frequencies, run by Andrea Rossetti, MD at 4 sites in Switzerland.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 4 inclusion and 4 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Jul 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in Switzerland. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Mortality (time frame: 6 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03129438, which also lists 5 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Jul 2019.