Disorders of consciousness (DOC) are among the major challenges of contemporary medicine, mostly due to the high rates of misdiagnoses in clinical assessment, based on behavioral scales. This turns our attention to potentially objective neuroimaging methods. Paradigms based on electroencephalography (EEG) are most suited for bedside applications, but sensitive to artifacts. These problems are especially pronounced in pediatric patients.

We present the first study on the assessment of pediatric DOC patients by means of command-following procedures and involving long-latency cognitive event-related potentials. To deal with the above mentioned challenges, we construct a specialized signal processing scheme including artifact correction and rejection, parametrization, classification and final assessment of the statistical significance. To compensate for the possible bias of the tests involved in the final diagnosis, we propose the Monte Carlo evaluation of the processing pipeline. To compensate for possible sensory impairments of DOC patients, for each subject we check command-following responses to the stimuli in the major modalities: visual, tactile, and audio (words and sounds).

We test the scheme on 20 healthy volunteers and present results for 15 patients from a hospital for children with severe brain damage, in relation to their behavioral diagnosis on the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R).

Keywords:

References

1. M.-A. Bruno, A. Vanhaudenhuyse, A. Thibaut, G. Moonen and S. Laureys, From unresponsive wakefulness to minimally conscious plus and functional locked-in syndromes: Recent advances in our understanding of disorders of consciousness, J. Neurol. 258 (2011) 1373–1384. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
2. J. T. Giacino, S. Ashwal, N. Childs, R. Cranford, B. Jennett, D. I. Katz, J. P. Kelly, J. H. Rosenberg, J. Whyte, R. Zafonte et al., The minimally conscious state definition and diagnostic criteria, Neurology 58(3) (2002) 349–353. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
3. J. T. Giacino, K. Kalmar and J. Whyte, The JFK coma recovery scale-revised: Measurement characteristics and diagnostic utility, Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 85 (2004) 2020–2029. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
4. R. T. Seel, M. Sherer, J. Whyte, D. I. Katz, J. T. Giacino, A. M. Rosenbaum, F. M. Hammond, K. Kalmar, T. L.-B. Pape, R. Zafonte, R. C. Biester, D. Kaelin, J. Kean and N. Zasler, Assessment scales for disorders of consciousness: Evidence-based recommendations for clinical practice and research, Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 91(12) (2010) 1795–1813. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
5. J. Stender, O. Gosseries, M.-A. Bruno, V. Charland-Verville, A. Vanhaudenhuyse, A. Demertzi, C. Chatelle, M. Thonnard, A. Thibaut, L. Heine, A. Soddu, M. Boly, C. Schnakers, A. Gjedde and S. Laureys, Diagnostic precision of PET imaging and functional MRI in disorders of consciousness: A clinical validation study, The Lancet 384(9942) (2014) 514–522. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
6. B. Kotchoubey, Evoked and event-related potentials in disorders of consciousness: A quantitative review, Conscious Cogn. 54 (2017) 155–167. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
7. J. D. Sitt, J.-R. King, I. El Karoui, B. Rohaut, F. Faugeras, A. Gramfort, L. Cohen, M. Sigman, S. Dehaene and L. Naccache, Large scale screening of neural signatures of consciousness in patients in a vegetative or minimally conscious state, Brain 137(8) (2014) 2258–2270. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar
8. S. J. Mason and N. E. Graham, Areas beneath the relative operating characteristics (ROC) and relative operating levels (ROL) curves: Statistical significance and interpretation, Q. J. R. Meteorol. Soc. 128(584) (2002) 2145–2166. Crossref, ISI, Google Scholar
9. D. Cruse, S. Chennu, C. Chatelle, T. A. Bekinschtein, D. Fernandez-Espejo, J. D. Pickard, S. Laureys and A. M. Owen, Bedside detection of awareness in the vegetative state: A cohort study, The Lancet 378 (2011) 2088–2094. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
10. A. M. Goldfine, J. C. Bardin, Q. Noirhomme, J. J. Fins, N. D. Schiff and J. D. Victor, Reanalysis of Bedside detection of awareness in the vegetative state: A cohort study, The Lancet 381 (2013) 289–291. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
11. A. Kirschner, D. Cruse, S. Chennu, A. M. Owen and A. Hampshire, A P300-based cognitive assessment battery, Brain Behav. 5 (2015) e00336. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
12. H. Klekowicz, U. Malinowska, A. Piotrowska, D. Wołyńczyk-Gmaj, S. Niemcewicz and P. Durka, On the robust parametric detection of EEG artifacts in polysomnographic recordings, Neuroinformatics 7(2) (2009) 147–160. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
13. E. Jones, T. Oliphant, P. Peterson et al., SciPy: Open source scientific tools for Python (2001–), [accessed 2017-10-26, version 1.0.0]. Google Scholar
14. A. Gramfort, M. Luessi, E. Larson, D. A. Engemann, D. Strohmeier, C. Brodbeck, L. Parkkonen and M. S. Hmlinen, MNE software for processing MEG and EEG data, NeuroImage 86(Suppl C) (2014) 446–460. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
15. A. Gramfort, M. Luessi, E. Larson, D. Engemann, D. Strohmeier, C. Brodbeck, R. Goj, M. Jas, T. Brooks, L. Parkkonen and M. Hmlinen, MEG and EEG data analysis with mne-python, Front. Neurosci. 7 (2013) 267. Crossref, Medline, Google Scholar
16. E. Larson, A. Gramfort, D. A. Engemann, Jaeilepp, C. Brodbeck, M. Jas, T. L. Brooks, Jona Sassenhagen, M. Luessi, J.-R. King, R. Goj, M. Wronkiewicz, M. van Vliet, C. Holdgraf, Yousrabk, A. Leggitt, A. R. Dykstra, R. Trachel, Lorenzo Desantis, A. Panda, mbillingr, dgwakeman, M. Magnuski, D. Strohmeier, T. Linzen, H. Bharadwaj, E. Ruzich, alexandre barachant, cmoutard and C. Bailey, mne-tools/mne-python: v0.14 (March 2017). Google Scholar
17. F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot and E. Duchesnay, Scikit-learn: Machine learning in Python, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 12 (2011) 2825–2830. ISI, Google Scholar
18. D. Bamber, The area above the ordinal dominance graph and the area below the receiver operating characteristic graph, J. Math. Psychol. 12(4) (1975) 387–415. Crossref, Google Scholar
19. E. Maris and R. Oostenveld, Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG-and MEG-data, J. Neurosci. Methods 164(1) (2007) 177–190. Crossref, Medline, ISI, Google Scholar

Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!
Check out our titles in neural networks today!

Vol. 29, No. 03

Metrics

History

Accepted 4 October 2018

Published: 24 December 2018

Information

This is an Open Access article published by World Scientific Publishing Company. It is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY) License. Further distribution of this work is permitted, provided the original work is properly cited.

Keywords

PDF download

System Upgrade on Tue, Oct 25th, 2022 at 2am (EDT)

Assessment of Statistically Significant Command-Following in Pediatric Patients with Disorders of Consciousness, Based on Visual, Auditory and Tactile Event-Related Potentials

Abstract

References

Recommended