Cerebral fat embolism (CFE) is an uncommon incomplete type of fat embolism syndrome (FES), characterized by purely cerebral involvement. It usually occurs 12–72 hours after the initial trigger, mainly represented by closed, long-bone multiple fractures of the lower extremities. Neurological manifestations are mainly characterized by headache, confusion, seizures, focal deficit, and alteration of the consciousness state up to coma onset. It represents a diagnostic challenge, above all when secondary to uncommon nontraumatic causes, because neurological signs and symptoms are variable and nonspecific, not satisfying the Gurd and Wilson’s criteria, the diagnostic features most widely used today for FES diagnosis. Neuroimaging (mainly MRI, but in some cases, brain computed tomography too) can hasten the diagnosis, avoiding other unnecessary investigations and treatment. Usually self-limiting, CFE may sometimes be fatal. Treatment is to date mainly supportive and prophylactic strategies are considered an important tool to decrease the development of fat embolism and, consequently, the rate of CFE.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

The combination of EEG/SEP findings allows prediction of good and poor outcome (within 12 h after CA) and of poor outcome (after 48-72 h). Recording of EEG and SEPs in the same patients allows always an increase in the number of cases correctly classified, and an increase of the reliability of prognostication in a single patient due to concordance of patterns.

The data presented here are related to our research article entitled “Neurophysiology and neuroimaging accurately predict poor neurological outcome within 24 hours after cardiac arrest: a prospective multicentre prognostication study (ProNeCA)” [1].We report a secondary analysis on the ability of somatosensory evoked potentials (SEPs), brain computed tomography (CT) and electroencephalography (EEG) to predict poor neurological outcome at 6 months in 346 patients who were comatose after cardiac arrest. Differently from the related research article, here we included cerebral performance category (CPC) 3 among poor outcomes, so that the outcomes are dichotomised as CPC 1–2 (absent to mild neurological disability: good outcome) vs. CPC 3–5 (severe neurological disability, persistent vegetative state, or death: poor outcome). The accuracy of the index tests was recalculated accordingly. A bilaterally absent/absent-pathological amplitude (AA/AP) N20 SEPs wave, a Grey Matter/White Matter (GM/WM) ratio <1.21 on brain CT and an isoelectric or burst suppression EEG predicted poor outcome with 49.6%, 42.2% and 29.8% sensitivity, respectively, and 100% specificity. The distribution of positive results of the three predictors did not overlap completely in the population of patients with poor outcome, so that when combining them the overall sensitivity raised to 61.2%.

No abstract