Improving the ability to predict hospital mortality among adults by combining two status epilepticus outcome scoring tools

Impact of social factors on the outcome of status epilepticus

In this review we look at the evidence of the impact of social factors, both inherent and external on the prognosis of status epilepticus (SE). Specifically, we look at the impact of gender, ethnicity, educational level and social deprivation on the incidence and prognosis of SE. We found evidence of clear differences in SE incidence and mortality by ethnicity (at least in the United States) with the highest incidence and lowest mortality rates in black populations. One study was identified which demonstrated a clear association of low educational attainment and increased mortality in epilepsy but not specifically SE. Similarly, there was evidence of a clear association (in adults) between social deprivation and epilepsy but again not specifically SE. Finally, there was weak evidence that social deprivation/lower economic status may be associated with higher SE mortality but this may be explained by other factors. This paper was presented at the 9th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and Acute Seizures held in April 2024.

Mortality and morbidity of status epilepticus over the long term

Status epilepticus is associated with high mortality and morbidity, both in the acute phase and over the long term. However, the long-term outcome of SE is not well studied, and there is no consensus on how to measure and predict it. Moreover, the factors that influence the long-term outcome of SE are complex and multifactorial, and may vary depending on the patient's characteristics, the SE etiology and type, and the treatment and complications. The aim of this article is to review the current literature on the mortality and morbidity of SE over the long term and to discuss the challenges and perspectives for future research. Proceedings of the 9th London-Innsbruck Colloquium on Status Epilepticus and acute seizures.

Nonconvulsive status epilepticus in neurocritical care: A critical reappraisal of outcome prediction scores

OBJECTIVE

Nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) is a frequent condition in the neurocritical care unit (NCCU) patient population, with high morbidity and mortality. We aimed to assess the validity of available outcome prediction scores for prognostication in an NCCU patient population in relation to their admission reason (NCSE vs. non-NCSE related).

METHODS

All 196 consecutive patients diagnosed with NCSE during the NCCU stay between January 2010 and December 2020 were included. Demographics, Simplified Acute Physiology Score II (SAPS II), NCSE characteristics, and in-hospital and 3-month outcome were extracted from the electronic charts. Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE), and encephalitis, NCSE, diazepam resistance, imaging features, and tracheal intubation score (END-IT) were evaluated as previously described. Univariable and multivariable analysis and comparison of sensitivity/specificity/positive and negative predictive values/accuracy were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 30.1% died during the hospital stay, and 63.5% of survivors did not achieve favorable outcome at 3 months after onset of NCSE. Patients admitted primarily due to NCSE had longer NCSE duration and were more likely to be intubated at diagnosis. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) for SAPS II, EMSE, and STESS when predicting mortality was between .683 and .762. The ROC for SAPS II, EMSE, STESS, and END-IT when predicting 3-month outcome was between .649 and .710. The accuracy in predicting mortality/outcome was low, when considering both proposed cutoffs and optimized cutoffs (estimated using the Youden Index) as well as when adjusting for admission reason.

SIGNIFICANCE

The scores EMSE, STESS, and END-IT perform poorly when predicting outcome of patients with NCSE in an NCCU environment. They should be interpreted cautiously and only in conjunction with other clinical data in this particular patient group.

The value of serum albumin concentration in predicting functional outcome of status epilepticus: An observational study

OBJECTIVE

Status epilepticus (SE) is a common neurological emergency with unsatisfying prognoses, and accurate prediction of functional outcome is beneficial in clinical decision-making. The relationship between serum albumin concentration and outcome of SE patients has yet to be unveiled.

METHODS

Clinical profiles of SE patients admitted to Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, from April 2017 to November 2020, were analyzed retrospectively. Outcomes of SE patients at discharge were divided into two groups based on the modified Rankin Scale (mRS): favorable outcome (mRS: 0-3) and unfavorable outcome (mRS: 4-6).

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients were enrolled. Unfavorable functional outcome at discharge was reported in 60.8% (31/51). Serum albumin concentration at admission and the Encephalitis-NCSE-Diazepam resistance-Image abnormalities-Tracheal intubation (END-IT) score remained independent predictors for functional outcome of SE patients. A lower albumin concentration at admission and higher END-IT score indicated a higher chance of unfavorable outcome for SE patients. The cut-off value of serum albumin to predict unfavorable outcome was 35.2 g/L, with a sensitivity of 67.7% and specificity of 85.0%, and an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) of .738 (95% CI: .600-.876, p = .004). The preferable END-IT score with optimal sensitivity (74.2%) and specificity (60%) was 2 and the area under the ROC was .742, with 95% CI of .608-.876 (p = .004).

SIGNIFICANCE

Serum albumin concentration at admission and the END-IT score are two independent predictive factors for short-term outcome of SE patients, moreover, the serum albumin concentration is not inferior to the END-IT score in indicating functional outcome at discharge.

Severity scores for status epilepticus in the ICU: systemic illness also matters

BACKGROUND

Current prognostic scores for status epilepticus (SE) may not be adequate for patients in ICU who usually have more severe systemic conditions or more refractory episodes of SE. We aimed to compare the prognostic performance of two SE scores, Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) and Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) score, with four systemic severity scores, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation 2 (APACHE-2), Simplified Acute Physiology Score 2 (SAPS-2), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, and Inflammation, Nutrition, Consciousness, Neurologic function and Systemic condition (INCNS) score in critically ill patients with SE.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study of a prospectively identified SE cohort was conducted in the ICU at a tertiary-care center. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and associations with outcomes of STESS, EMSE, INCNS, APACHE-2, SAPS-2, and SOFA score for the prediction of in-hospital mortality and no return to baseline condition were assessed.

RESULTS

Between January 2015 and December 2020, 166 patients with SE in ICU were included in the study. In predicting in-hospital death, APACHE-2 (0.72), SAPS-2 (0.73), and SOFA score (0.71) had higher AUCs than STESS (0.58) and EMSE (0.69). In predicting no return to baseline condition, the AUC of APACHE-2 (0.75) was the highest, and the AUC of INCNS (0.55) was the lowest. When the specificity approached 90%, the sensitivity values of these scores were not quite acceptable (< 40%). Neither SE scores nor systemic severity scores had desirable prognostic power. In the multivariate logistic regression analyses, the best combinations of scores always included at least one or more systemic severity scores.

CONCLUSIONS

STESS and EMSE were insufficient in outcome prediction for SE patients in ICU, and EMSE was marginally better than STESS. Systemic illness matters in ICU patients with SE, and SE scores should be modified to achieve better accuracy in this severely ill population. This study mostly refers to severely ill patients in the ICU.

Prognostic scores in status epilepticus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The performance of prognostic scores of status epilepticus (SE) has been reported in very heterogeneous cohorts. We aimed to provide a summary of the available evidence on their respective performance. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for relevant articles. Studies were reviewed for eligibility for meta-analysis of the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) and for meta-analysis of sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) in predicting in-hospital mortality with scores in which at least two external evaluations had been published. This study was registered with PROSPERO (international prospective register of systematic reviews) (CRD42022325766). Study quality was assessed using Prediction model Risk Of Bias ASsessment Tool (PROBAST). In the meta-analysis of AUC, 21 studies were pooled for STESS (Status Epilepticus Severity Score), five for EMSE-EAC (Epidemiology-based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus - Etiology, Age, level of Consciousness), five for EMSE-EACE (EMSE - Etiology, Age, level of Consciousness, EEG), and two for ENDIT (Encephalitis, nonconvulsive status epilepticus, Diazepam resistance, Imaging abnormalities, Tracheal intubation). The pooled AUC of STESS, EMSE-EAC, EMSE-EACE, and ENDIT was 0.74 (95% CI: 0.71-0.78), 0.68 (95% CI 0.63-0.72), 0.77 (95% CI: 0.72-0.81), and 0.78 (95% CI: 0.70-0.87), respectively. The pooled sensitivity of STESS-3, STESS-4, EMSE-EACE-64, and ENDIT-4 was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.80-0.86), 0.60 (95% CI: 0.55-0.65), 0.76 (95% CI: 0.67-0.83), and 0.70 (95% CI: 0.55-0.82), respectively. Their pooled specificity was 0.50 (95% CI: 0.48-0.52), 0.74 (95% CI: 0.72-0.76), 0.63 (95% CI: 0.59-0.67), and 0.65 (95% CI: 0.61-0.70), respectively. Their pooled PPV was 0.27 (95% CI: 0.24-0.30), 0.35 (95% CI: 0.29-0.41), 0.33 (95% CI: 0.24-0.43), and 0.20 (95% CI: 0.13-0.27). Their pooled NPV was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.93-0.96), 0.90 (95% CI: 0.89-0.92), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.80-0.98), and 0.95 (95% CI: 0.92-0.98). Variations in performance were observed in patients' subgroups, such as critically ill patients and refractory cases. Investigated scores only have acceptable AUC, sensitivity, and specificity for predicting in-hospital mortality, with the EMSE-EAC having a lower discriminative power. STESS-3 has the highest sensitivity, and STESS-4 the highest specificity, but neither combines acceptable sensitivity and specificity. All these scores had high NPV but very low PPV. Caution should be exercised in their clinical use. Further studies are required to develop more accurate scores.

Mortality, Disability and Prognostic Factors of Status Epilepticus: A Nationwide Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The outcome of status epilepticus (SE) largely varies depending on clinical characteristics. Risk stratification is necessary for tailoring the aggressiveness of treatment and predicting outcomes of individual patients with SE. In this study, we assessed differences in mortality, neurologic disability, and prognostic factors associated with SE across sociodemographic and clinical characteristics.

METHODS

We conducted a nationwide population-based retrospective cohort study using the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) database linked with the national death and disability registries. SE was identified from admission or emergency room visits using a diagnostic code of G41 from the International Classification of Disease, 10^th Revision. Individuals with new-onset SE that occurred from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2018, were included. Active epilepsy, refractoriness of SE, potential etiology, and comorbidities were ascertained by diagnostic codes and/or prescription records from the NHIS database as potential prognostic factors. Outcomes included 30-day and 1-year mortality and neurologic disabilities following SE. Prognostic factors for mortality were assessed by the Cox regression hazard model. We performed a subgroup analysis according to age: pediatric SE (age < 20 years old) and adult SE (age ≥ 20 years old).

RESULTS

A total of 33,814 new-onset SE patients were included (6,818 children/adolescents and 26,996 adults). The 30-day mortality was 8.5% (1.8% in pediatric SE and 10.2% in adult SE), and the 1-year mortality was 25.1% (4.6% in pediatric SE and 30.3% in adult SE). Overall, 10.7% of patients newly acquired neurologic disabilities following SE, with the highest incidence in children aged 5 to 9 years (21.3%). Intractable epilepsy developed in 0.8% of entire SE. Old age, presence of acute etiology, and refractoriness were poor prognostic factors for mortality in both pediatric and adult SE. Male sex, low economic status, no active epilepsy, and comorbidities were additional factors for a poor prognosis in adults.

CONCLUSIONS

New-onset SE was associated with substantial mortality and disability. While SE-related mortality was higher in adults, disabilities developed more commonly in children and adolescents. The major determinants of mortality differed between pediatric and adult SE.

Utility of the END-IT Score to Predict the outcome of Childhood Status Epilepticus: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Introduction:

Scoring systems to predict outcomes in pediatric status epilepticus (SE) are limited. We sought to assess usefulness of the END-IT score in pediatric SE.

Methodology:

We conducted a retrospective study at a tertiary hospital in New Delhi, India. Children aged 1 month–18 years who presented with seizure for ≥5 min/actively convulsing to emergency were enrolled. END-IT score was calculated and correlated with outcome at discharge using Pediatric Overall Performance Category (POPC) scale, in-hospital mortality, and progression to refractory and super-refractory SE (SRSE).

Results:

We enrolled 140 children (mean age 5.8 years; 67.1% males). Seven children died and 15 had unfavorable outcomes. The predictive accuracy of END-IT at a cutoff of > 2: for unfavorable outcome (POPC score ≥3) was: sensitivity 0.73 (95% CI: 0.45–0.92), specificity 0.94 (95% CI: 0.89–0.98), PPV 0.61 (95% CI: 0.36–0.83), NPV 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92–0.99), positive likelihood ratio (13.09), F1 score (0.666); for death: sensitivity 0.86 (95% CI: 0.42–0.99), specificity 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85–0.95), PPV 0.33 (95% CI: 0.13–0.59), NPV 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96–1.00), F1 score (0.48); for RSE: sensitivity 0.80 (95%CI: 0.28–0.99), specificity 0.90 (95% CI: 0.83–0.94), PPV 0.22 (95% CI: 0.06–0.48) NPV 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96–1.00), F1 score (0.35); for SRSE: sensitivity 0.67 (95% CI: 0.22–0.96) specificity 0.75 (95% CI: 0.66–0.82), PPV 0.22 (95% CI: 0.06–0.48) NPV 0.98 (95% CI: 0.94–0.99), F1 score (0.33).

Conclusion:

We demonstrate utility of the END-IT score to predict short-term outcomes as well as progression to refractory and SRSE for the first time among children with SE.

Prediction of in-hospital mortality in status epilepticus: Evaluation of four scoring tools in younger and older adult patients

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to evaluate the predictive capacity of four scoring tools: the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), the Encephalitis-NCSE-Diazepam resistance-Image abnormalities-Tracheal intubation (END-IT) score, and two variable combinations of the Epidemiology-based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) in younger and older adult patients with status epilepticus (SE).

METHODS

We present a retrospective hospital-based analysis with a focus on adult patients with SE at three tertiary care hospitals in the Zhejiang province of China. Data were collected from January 2013 to December 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: younger adult patients (18-64 years old) and older adult patients (≥65 years old). Clinical outcomes (dead or alive) were assessed at hospital discharge. The four scoring tools were used to predict in-hospital mortality in both younger and older adult patients.

RESULTS

The mortality rate in older adult patients (25.4%) was higher than in younger adult patients (12.9%). Compared with the elderly, the younger adult patients had a higher proportion of encephalitis, while acute cerebrovascular disease and Charlson Complications Index (CCI) were lower. For the younger adult patients, END-IT had the largest area under the curve (AUC) of 0.843 (95% CI, 0.772-0.899), which was higher than the EMSE-EAL value of 0.687 (95% CI, 0.603-0.763, p < 0.05) and EMSE-EAC of 0.646 (95% CI, 0.561-0.725, p < 0.05). For the older adult patients, EMSE-EAL had the largest AUC of 0.843 (95% CI, 0.738-0.919), which was significantly higher than STESS with an AUC of 0.676 (95% CI, 0.554-0.782, p < 0.05). Moreover, the AUC of EMSE-EAL in the elderly was larger than in younger adult patients. The cutoffs in younger adult patients were STESS ≥ 4 (sensitivity 0.444, specificity 0.951), END-IT ≥ 3 (sensitivity 0.833, specificity 0.672), EMSE-EAL ≥ 31 (sensitivity 0.778, specificity 0.566), and EMSE-EAC ≥ 33 (sensitivity 0.833, specificity 0.492). However, the cutoffs in older adult patients were STESS ≥ 5 (sensitivity 0.500, specificity 0.925), END-IT ≥ 2 (sensitivity 0.944, specificity 0.547), EMSE-EAL ≥ 30 (sensitivity 0.944, specificity 0.623), and EMSE-EAC ≥ 31 (sensitivity 0.944, specificity 0.415).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicated that the STESS, END-IT, EMSE-EAC, and EMSE-EAL scores have excellent capacity to predict in-hospital mortality in both younger and older adult patients with SE. Our study supports the use of END-IT in patients under 65 years of age and suggests that EMSE-EAL is the most suitable scoring tool for patients over 65.