Treatment of ELectrographic STatus Epilepticus After Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation-2: Multicenter Randomised Clinical Trial and Health Economic Evaluation of Anti-seizure Treatment in Comatose Cardiac Arrest Patients With SE on Continuous EEG

Rationale: Around 7500 comatose patients after cardiac arrest and resuscitation are admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) in the Netherlands and Belgium, yearly. Approximately half eventually dies from severe brain injury. EEG is used as a predictor of outcome, helping decide whether life sustaining therapies should be pursued or withdrawn. EEG shows epileptiform patterns meeting criteria for electrographic status epilepticus (ESE) in up to 10% of patients, with 80-100% case fatality. With the TELSTAR-1 trial, we showed that anti-seizure treatment of unselected patients with epileptiform patterns is not associated with a better outcome. However, it remains unclear whether treatment of (possible) ESE will improve outcome, or if ESE simply represents irreversible severe brain damage, in which case such treatment will be futile. This translates into ongoing practice variation. To provide comatose cardiac arrest survivors with the best medical treatment options, while at the same time preventing unnecessary costly ICU treatment, unequivocal evidence of efficacy or futility of ESE treatment is needed.

Objectives: It is the primary objective to study whether ESE treatment improves outcome of comatose patients after cardiac arrest. It is the secondary objective to study the impact on healthcare costs of ESE treatment.

Main trial endpoints: The primary outcome measure will be functional recovery expressed as the score on the extended Glasgow Outcome Scale (eGOS) at six months after cardiac arrest. The primary effect parameter will be the common odds ratio for any shift towards a better outcome in the intervention group, analyzed by multivariable ordinal logistic regression.

Secondary trial endpoints: Secondary outcome measures include data on quality of life, cognitive functioning, and the use of resources. Cost-effectiveness will be assessed, separately for Belgium and for the Netherlands, adhering to 'KCE' and 'Zorginstituut' guidelines for pharmaco-economic evaluations, respectively.

Trial design: This will be a comparative effectiveness study, comparing two standard treatment regimens. We will conduct a prospective multicentre trial with randomized treatment allocation, open label treatment, and blinded endpoint assessment on twenty intensive care units in the Netherlands and Belgium.