Untangling operational failures of the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS)

Evaluation of prognostic scores for status epilepticus in the neurology ICU: A retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

Status epilepticus (SE) in the neurology intensive care unit (ICU) is associated with significant morbidity. We aimed to evaluate the utility of existing prognostic scores, namely the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), Epidemiology Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE)-EACE and Encephalitis-Nonconvulsive Status Epilepticus-Diazepam Resistance-Image Abnormalities-Tracheal Intubation (END-IT), among SE patients in the neurology ICU.

METHODS

Neurology ICU patients with SE requiring continuous electroencephalography (cEEG) monitoring over a 10 year period were included. The STESS, EMSE-EACE and END-IT scores were applied retrospectively. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to assess the discriminatory value of the scores for inpatient mortality and functional decline, as measured by increase in the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) on discharge.

RESULTS

Eighty-five patients were included in the study, of which 71 (83.5%) had refractory SE. Inpatient mortality was 36.5%. Sixty - seven (78.8%) of patients suffered functional decline, with a median mRS of 5 upon hospital discharge. The AUCs of the STESS, EMSE-EACE and END-IT scores associated with inpatient mortality were 0.723 (95% CI 0.613-0.833), 0.722 (95% CI 0.609-0.834) and 0.560 (95% CI 0.436-0.684) respectively. The AUCs of the STESS, EMSE-EACE and END-IT scores associated with functional decline were 0.604 (95% CI 0.468-0.741), 0.596 (95% CI 0.439-0.754) and 0.477 (95% CI 0.331-0.623).

SIGNIFICANCE

SE was associated with high mortality and morbidity in this cohort of neurology ICU patients requiring cEEG monitoring. The STESS and EMSE-EACE scores had acceptable AUCs for prediction of inpatient mortality. However, the STESS, EMSE-EACE and END-IT were poorly-correlated with discharge functional outcomes. Further refinements of the scores may be necessary among neurology ICU patients for predicting discharge functional outcomes.

Status epilepticus: what's new for the intensivist

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Status epilepticus (SE) is a common neurologic emergency affecting about 36.1/100 000 person-years that frequently requires intensive care unit (ICU) admission. There have been advances in our understanding of epidemiology, pathophysiology, and EEG monitoring of SE, and there have been large-scale treatment trials, discussed in this review.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent changes in the definitions of SE have helped guide management protocols and we have much better predictors of outcome. Observational studies have confirmed the efficacy of benzodiazepines and large treatment trials indicate that all routinely used second line treatments (i.e., levetiracetam, valproate and fosphenytoin) are equally effective. Better understanding of the pathophysiology has indicated that nonanti-seizure medications aimed at underlying pathological processes should perhaps be considered in the treatment of SE; already immunosuppressant treatments are being more widely used in particular for new onset refractory status epilepticus (NORSE) and Febrile infection-related epilepsy syndrome (FIRES) that sometimes revealed autoimmune or paraneoplastic encephalitis. Growing evidence for ICU EEG monitoring and major advances in automated analysis of the EEG could help intensivist to assess the control of electrographic seizures.

SUMMARY

Research into the morbi-mortality of SE has highlighted the potential devastating effects of this condition, emphasizing the need for rapid and aggressive treatment, with particular attention to cardiorespiratory and neurological complications. Although we now have a good evidence-base for the initial status epilepticus management, the best treatments for the later stages are still unclear and clinical trials of potentially disease-modifying therapies are long overdue.

Correlation between inflammatory markers over time and disease severity in status epilepticus: a preliminary study

Objectives

Convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) is a major subtype of status epilepticus that is known to be closely associated with systemic inflammation. Some important inflammatory biomarkers of this disorder include the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR), systemic immune inflammation index (SII), and pan-immune inflammation value (PIV). This study aimed to determine the NLR, PLR, MLR, SII, and PIV levels before and after treatment in adult patients with CSE and investigated the relationship of these parameters with disease severity.

Methods

This retrospective study analyzed data from 103 adult patients with CSE and 103 healthy controls. The neutrophil, monocyte, platelet, and lymphocyte counts, as well as the NLR, PLR, MLR, SII, and PIV, were compared in adult patients with CSE during acute seizures (within 2 h of admission) and after treatment relief (1-2 weeks of complete seizure control). Furthermore, multivariate linear regression analysis investigated the relationship between NLR, PLR, MLR, SII, and PIV with the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS).

Results

The data revealed significant differences (p < 0.05) in neutrophils, monocytes, lymphocytes, NLR, PLR, MLR, SII, and PIV between adult patients with CSE during acute seizures and after treatment relief. The average neutrophil count was high during acute seizures in the patient group and decreased after remission. In contrast, the average lymphocyte count was lower after remission (p < 0.05). Furthermore, significant differences (p < 0.05) were observed in monocytes, lymphocytes, platelets, NLR, PLR, MLR, and PIV levels between adult patients with CSE after remission and the healthy control group. Multivariate linear regression analysis showed no significant correlation between NLR, PLR, MLR, SII, and PIV with STESS.

Conclusion

The results of this study indicated that adult patients with CSE experienced a transient systemic inflammatory response during acute seizures, which gradually returned to baseline levels after remission. However, there was a lack of robust clinical evidence correlating the severity of adult CSE and systemic inflammatory response.

Prognostic value of Salzburg nonconvulsive status epilepticus criteria: The SACE score

OBJECTIVE

This study was undertaken to investigate the association between the Salzburg nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) criteria and in-hospital outcome, to determine the predictive accuracy of the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), modified STESS (mSTESS), Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE), and END-IT (encephalitis, NCSE, diazepam resistance, imaging features, and tracheal intubation) in NCSE patients, and to develop a new prognostic score specifically designed for NCSE patients.

METHODS

Clinical and electroencephalographic (EEG) data of adult patients treated for NCSE from 2020 to 2023 were retrospectively assessed. Age, sex, modified Rankin Scale at admission, comorbidities, history of seizures, etiology, status epilepticus type, and outcome were collected from the patients' digital charts. EEG data were assessed and categorized applying the Salzburg NCSE criteria. In-hospital death was defined as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 116 NCSE patients were included. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that Salzburg NCSE criterion A2 (ictal morphological, spatial, and temporal evolution) was associated with in-hospital survival. The best STESS cutoff was ≥4 (sensitivity = .62, specificity = .69, accuracy = 67%). mSTESS ≥ 5 reached a sensitivity of .68, a specificity of .57, and an overall accuracy of 60%, EMSE ≥ 64 a sensitivity of .82, a specificity of .39, and an overall accuracy of 52%, and END-IT ≥ 3 a sensitivity of .65, a specificity of .44, and an overall accuracy of 50%. Through a hypothesis-generating approach, we developed the SACE score, which integrates EEG features (criterion A2) with patient age (with a 75-year cutoff), history of seizures, and level of consciousness. With a cutoff of ≥3, it had a sensitivity of .77, a specificity of .74, and an overall accuracy of 76%, performing better than other prognostic scores.

SIGNIFICANCE

We developed a new user-friendly scoring system, the SACE score, which integrates EEG features with other established outcome-related variables assessable in early stages, to assist neurologists and neurointensivists in making more tailored prognostic decisions for NCSE patients.

Association of Peri-ictal MRI Abnormalities With Mortality, Antiseizure Medication Refractoriness, and Morbidity in Status Epilepticus

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Status epilepticus (SE) is a life-threatening emergency requiring a prompt assessment of patient prognosis to guide management. MRI allows the identification of peri-ictal MRI abnormalities (PMAs) and provides insight into brain structural modifications induced by SE. However, little is known about the significance of PMA in SE prognosis. The aim of this study was to determine whether PMAs are associated with an increased mortality in SE and to establish the association between PMA and refractoriness to antiseizure medications, complications encountered, and induced morbidity.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study including all eligible consecutive patients over 15 years old and hospitalized with SE at Bordeaux University Hospital (France) between January 2015 and December 2019. The primary end point was in-hospital mortality. A dedicated neuroradiologic reassessment was performed, together with a comprehensive medical review assessing baseline characteristics, in-hospital death, SE characterization, drug refractoriness, and following outcome in survivors.

RESULTS

Of 307 patients included, 79 (26%) showed PMA related to SE. Demographic, functional status at baseline and median delay between SE onset and MRI examination were similar in the PMA-positive and PMA-negative groups. In-hospital death occurred in 15% (45/307) patients and was significantly higher in the PMA-positive group (27%, 21/79 vs 11%, 24/228; p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, the presence of PMA (odds ratio [OR] 2.86, 95% CI 1.02-8.18; p = 0.045), together with SE duration (OR 1.01, 95% CI 1.01-1.02; p = 0.007), older age at SE onset (OR 1.05, 95% CI 1.01-1.09; p = 0.013), preexisting ultimately fatal comorbidity (OR 4.01, 95% CI 1.56-10.6; p = 0.004), and acute lesional SE etiology (OR 3.74, 95% CI 1.45-10.2; p = 0.007) were independent predictors associated with in-hospital death. Patients with PMA had a higher risk of refractory SE (71 vs 33%, p < 0.001). Among survivors, delayed-onset epilepsy (40% vs 21%, p = 0.009) occurred more frequently in the PMA-positive group.

DISCUSSION

PMA-positive cases had a higher mortality rate in the largest cohort so far to assess the prognosis value of PMA in SE. As a noninvasive and easily available tool, PMA represents a promising structural biomarker for developing a personalized approach to prognostication in patients with SE receiving MRI.

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.

Pediatric Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STEPSS): Predictive Performance of Functional Outcomes: A Prospective Single-Center Study

Objective: To prospectively investigate the predictive value of the modified Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) for pediatric use (STEPSS) regarding unfavorable outcomes in the short term. Methods: Patients diagnosed as status epilepticus in the emergency department between January 2019 and June 2021 at a tertiary center of the University of Health Sciences, Dr. Behcet Uz Children's Hospital, were included in the study. The patients were followed up in the emergency department, neurology clinic, and pediatric intensive care unit until discharge. Demographic and clinical characteristics, STEPSS, and Pediatric Overall Performance Category Scale (POPC) scores were calculated. We defined a Pediatric Overall Performance Category Scale score ≥3 as an unfavorable outcome. We compared the effect of STEPSS on unfavorable outcomes and mortality. Results: 124 children were included. The median age was 33 months (interquartile range 16.2-84.7). Seventy-two (58.1%) patients had acute symptomatic etiology. We found that the STEPSS score with the receiver operating characteristic curve (area under the curve  = 0.917, P < .001) could predict unfavorable outcomes (Pediatric Overall Performance Category Scale score ≥3) in children with status epilepticus. The Youden index (0.76) showed that a STEPSS score >2 was the optimal cutoff point for an unfavorable outcome. We found STEPSS useful in predicting mortality (area under the curve  = 0.853, P < .001). The Youden index (0.58) indicated that a STEPSS >2 was the optimal cutoff for mortality: sensitivity 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.58-0.99), specificity 0.67 (95% CI 0.57-0.77), positive predictive value 0.21, negative predictive value 0.98, positive likelihood ratio 2.7, negative likelihood ratio 0.14. Conclusion: We determined that STEPSS can be predicted unfavorable outcomes and mortality. We think that STEPSS can be used as a useful clinical score with further studies and external validations.

Neurologic Outcome Prediction in the Intensive Care Unit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The burden of severe and disabling neurologic injury on survivors, families, and society can be profound. Neurologic outcome prediction, or neuroprognostication, is a complex undertaking with many important ramifications. It allows patients with good prognoses to be supported aggressively, survive, and recover; conversely, it avoids inappropriate prolonged and costly care in those with devastating injuries.

RECENT FINDINGS

Striving to maintain a high prediction performance during prognostic assessments encompasses acknowledging the shortcomings of this task and the challenges created by advances in medicine, which constantly shift the natural history of neurologic conditions. Embracing the unknowns of outcome prediction and the boundaries of knowledge surrounding neurologic recovery and plasticity is a necessary step toward refining neuroprognostication practices and improving the accuracy of prognostic impressions. The pillars of modern neuroprognostication include comprehensive characterization of neurologic injury burden (primary and secondary injuries), gauging cerebral resilience and estimated neurologic reserve, and tying it all together with individual values surrounding the acceptable extent of disability and the difficulties of an arduous convalescence journey.

SUMMARY

Comprehensive multimodal frameworks of neuroprognostication using different prognostic tools to portray the burden of neurologic injury coupled with the characterization of individual values and the degree of cerebral reserve and resilience are the cornerstone of modern outcome prediction.

Prediction of Postictal Delirium Following Status Epilepticus in the ICU: First Insights of an Observational Cohort Study

OBJECTIVES

To identify early predictors of postictal delirium in adult patients after termination of status epilepticus.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

ICUs at a Swiss tertiary academic medical center.

PATIENTS

Status epilepticus patients treated on the ICUs for longer than 24 hours from 2012 to 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

METHODS

Primary outcome was postictal delirium during post-status epilepticus treatment defined as an Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist greater than or equal to 4. Associations with postictal delirium were secondary outcomes. A time-dependent multivariable Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify risks of postictal delirium. It included variables that differed between patients with and without delirium and established risk factors for delirium (age, sex, number of inserted catheters, illness severity [quantified by the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment and Status Epilepticus Severity Score], neurodegenerative disease, dementia, alcohol/drug consumption, infections, coma during status epilepticus, dose of benzodiazepines, anesthetics, and mechanical ventilation).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Among 224 patients, post-status epilepticus Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist was increased in 83% with delirium emerging in 55% with a median duration of 2 days (interquartile range 1-3 d). Among all variables, only the history of alcohol and/or drug consumption was associated with increased hazards for delirium in multivariable analyses (hazard ratio = 3.35; 95% CI, 1.53-7.33).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides first exploratory insights into the risks of postictal delirium in adult status epilepticus patients treated in the ICU. Delirium following status epilepticus is frequent, lasting mostly 2-3 days. Our findings that with the exception of a history of alcohol and/or drug consumption, other risk factors of delirium were not found to be associated with a risk of postictal delirium may be related to the limited sample size and the exploratory nature of our study. Further investigations are needed to investigate the role of established risk factors in other status epilepticus cohorts. In the meantime, our results indicate that the risk of delirium should be especially considered in patients with a history of alcohol and/or drug consumption.

[Pharmacotherapy and intensive care aspects of status epilepticus: update 2020/2021]

Die gezielte Therapie epileptischer Ereignisse und im Speziellen des Status epilepticus (SE) setzt das sichere Erkennen der Krankheitsbilder voraus, wofür gerade bei Formen mit vorwiegend nichtmotorischen Symptomen klinische und elektroenzephalographische Expertise notwendig ist. Die im Jahr 2020 erfolgte Fortschreibung der deutschen Leitlinie zur Behandlung des SE hält an der streng stufengerechten Therapie fest, die eskalierend die Anwendung von Benzodiazepinen, spezifischen Antiepileptika und Anästhetika vorsieht. Bisher ist die Eingrenzung eines in den allermeisten Fällen wirksamen sowie zugleich sicheren und interaktionsfreien Antiepileptikums nicht gelungen. Individuelle Vorerkrankungen und aktuelle Begleitumstände gehen daher genauso wie Erfahrungen des Behandlerteams in die differenzierte Behandlung des SE ein. Insbesondere bei therapierefraktären Formen des SE erweist sich die Therapie als durchaus kompliziert und hat regelhaft intensivmedizinische Implikationen. Mithin ergeben sich im Zuge der modernen SE-Behandlung zahlreiche interdisziplinäre Schnittstellen. Zukünftige wissenschaftliche Fragstellungen werden sich u. a. mit der optimalen Therapie des nonkonvulsiven SE und hier v. a. dem Ausmaß und dem Zeitpunkt von adäquaten Therapieschritten sowie mit assoziierten ethischen Fragen einer Therapieeskalation beschäftigen.

Safety and Efficacy of Coma Induction Following First-Line Treatment in Status Epilepticus: A 2-Center Study

OBJECTIVE

To explore the safety and efficacy of artificial coma induction to treat status epilepticus (SE) immediately after first-line antiseizure treatment instead of following the recommended approach of first using second-line drugs.

METHODS

Clinical and electrophysiologic data of all adult patients treated for SE from 2017 to 2018 in the Swiss academic medical care centers from Basel and Geneva were retrospectively assessed. Primary outcomes were return to premorbid neurologic function and in-hospital death. Secondary outcomes were the emergence of complications during SE, duration of SE, and intensive care unit (ICU) and hospital stays.

RESULTS

Of 230 patients, 205 received treatment escalation after first-line medication. Of those, 27.3% were directly treated with artificial coma and 72.7% with second-line nonanesthetic antiseizure drugs. Of the latter, 16.6% were subsequently put on artificial coma after failure of second-line treatment. Multivariable analyses revealed increasing odds for coma induction after first-line treatment with younger age, the presence of convulsions, and an increased SE severity as quantified by the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS). While outcomes and complications did not differ compared to patients with treatment escalation according to the guidelines, coma induction after first-line treatment was associated with shorter SE duration and ICU and hospital stays.

CONCLUSIONS

Early induction of artificial coma is performed in more than every fourth patient and especially in younger patients presenting with convulsions and more severe SE. Our data demonstrate that this aggressive treatment escalation was not associated with an increase in complications but with shorter duration of SE and ICU and hospital stays.

CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE

This study provides Class III evidence that early induction of artificial coma after unsuccessful first-line treatment for SE is associated with shorter duration of SE and ICU and hospital stays compared to the use of a second-line nonanesthetic antiseizure drug instead of or before anesthetics, without an associated increase in complications.

[S2k guidelines: status epilepticus in adulthood : Guidelines of the German Society for Neurology]

This S2k guideline on diagnosis and treatment of status epilepticus (SE) in adults is based on the last published version from 2021. New definitions and evidence were included in the guideline and the clinical pathway. A seizures lasting longer than 5 minutes (or ≥ 2 seizures over more than 5 mins without intermittend recovery to the preictal neurological state. Initial diagnosis should include a cCT or, if possible, an MRI. The EEG is highly relevant for diagnosis and treatment-monitoring of non-convulsive SE and for the exclusion or diagnosis of psychogenic non-epileptic seizures. As the increasing evidence supports the relevance of inflammatory comorbidities (e.g. pneumonia) related clinical chemistry should be obtained and repeated over the course of a SE treatment, and antibiotic therapy initiated if indicated.Treatment is applied on four levels: 1. Initial SE: An adequate dose of benzodiazepine is given i.v., i.m., or i.n.; 2. Benzodiazepine-refractory SE: I.v. drugs of 1st choice are levetiracetam or valproate; 3. Refractory SE (RSE) or 4. Super-refractory SE (SRSE): I.v. propofol or midazolam alone or in combination or thiopental in anaesthetic doses are given. In focal non-convulsive RSE the induction of a therapeutic coma depends on the circumstances and is not mandatory. In SRSE the ketogenic diet should be given. I.v. ketamine or inhalative isoflorane can be considered. In selected cased electroconvulsive therapy or, if a resectable epileptogenic zone can be defined epilepsy surgery can be applied. I.v. allopregnanolone or systemic hypothermia should not be used.

A Theoretical Paradigm for Evaluating Risk-Benefit of Status Epilepticus Treatment

Aggressive treatment of status epilepticus with anesthetic drugs can provide rapid seizure control, but it might lead to serious medical complications and worse outcomes. Using a decision analysis approach, this concise review provides a framework for individualized decision making about aggressive and nonaggressive treatment in status epilepticus. The authors propose and review the most relevant parameters guiding the risk-benefit analysis of treatment aggressiveness in status epilepticus and present real-world-based case examples to illustrate how these tools could be used at the bedside and serve to guide future research in refractory status epilepticus treatment.

Frequency and Implications of Complications in the ICU After Status Epilepticus: No Calm After the Storm

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the frequency, types, and implications of complications during intensive care in patients after status epilepticus has been successfully terminated.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

ICUs at a Swiss tertiary academic medical care center.

PATIENTS

Data were collected from the digital patient records of all adult patients with status epilepticus from 2012 to 2018.

INTERVENTIONS

None.

METHODS

Primary outcomes were defined as frequency of complications following status epilepticus termination and return to premorbid functional baseline. Univariable analyses regarding the relative risks of complications occurring after status epilepticus termination for no return to premorbid neurologic function were estimated by Poisson regression with robust error variance.

RESULTS

Of 311 patients with status epilepticus, 224 patients (72%) were treated on the ICU for more than 24 hours following status epilepticus termination. Ninety-six percent of patients remained in a prolonged state of altered consciousness for a median of 2 days (interquartile range, 1-3 d) and 80% had complications during their ICU treatment. Fifty-five percent had new-onset delirium with a median duration of 2 days (interquartile range, 1-3 d). Forty-two percent had mechanical ventilation for a median of 4 days (interquartile range, 2-11 d) and 21% had nosocomial infections diagnosed after status epilepticus. Multivariable analyses revealed that mechanical ventilation for more than 24 hours after status epilepticus, and arterial hypotension requiring vasopressors were independently associated with increased risk of no return to premorbid function (RRfor each additional day = 1.01; 95% CI, 1.02-1.03 and RRfor each additional day = 1.03; 95% CI, 1.01-1.05) and death (RRfor each additional day = 1.11; 95% CI, 1.04-1.19 and RRfor each additional day = 1.15; 95% CI, 1.03-1.28). Delirium was independently associated with a decreased relative risk of death (RRfor each additional day = 0.55; 95% CI, 0.37-0.80), but prolonged ICU- and hospital stays.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications after status epilepticus termination are frequent and associated with no return to premorbid function, death, and prolonged ICU- and hospital stays. These results call for heightened awareness and further studies mainly regarding prediction and preventive strategies in this context.

Accuracy of Calculated Free Valproate Levels in Adult Patients With Status Epilepticus

OBJECTIVE

To test the accuracy of an equation in adult patients with status epilepticus that calculates the free concentration of serum valproic acid (fVPA) from the total concentration of serum valproic acid (tVPA) and serum albumin.

METHODS

All adult patients with status epilepticus who were treated at a Swiss academic medical center between 2005 and 2018 with concurrent measurements of tVPA, fVPA, and serum albumin were included. fVPA was categorized as subtherapeutic, therapeutic (5-10 mg/L), or supratherapeutic. Agreement was defined as the proportion of measured and calculated fVPA falling within the same category.

RESULTS

Of 676 patients with status epilepticus, 104 had 506 measurements, with a median of 3 (interquartile range [IQR] 1.5-6.5) per patient. The median tVPA was 43.5 mg/L (27.4-63.6), with measured fVPA 9.1 mg/L (4.5-14.7) and calculated fVPA 10.1 mg/L (7.0-13.0), respectively. The median deviation of calculated from measured fVPA was -0.8 mg/L (-3.2 to 2.5) with 336 measurements >1 mg/L. While the association between measured and calculated fVPA was linear (regression coefficient 1.1, 95% confidence interval 0.9-1.2, p < 0.0001), the agreement on effective drug levels did not match in 39.8% of measurements regardless of serum albumin levels, with calculated fVPA overestimating measured fVPA in 30.4%. tVPA and serum albumin independently influenced the accuracy of the calculated fVPA in the multivariable model.

CONCLUSIONS

Calculated fVPA is inaccurate when using the proposed equation in adult patients with status epilepticus, calling for drug monitoring based on measured fVPA in this context.

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

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this study was to compare the predictive ability of the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), the Encephalitis-nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE)-Diazepam resistance-Image abnormalities-Tracheal intubation (END-IT), and the combination of these two scoring tools to predict mortality among inhospital patients with status epilepticus (SE).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted of adult patients with SE who were admitted to the neurology department, the emergency department, and the intensive care unit from January 2013 to December 2017. The patients were divided into two groups: survivors and nonsurvivors. The STESS data were obtained when the patient arrived at the hospital, and the END-IT data were collected 24 h after patients were initially treated in the hospital. The ability of the scoring tools to predict death in patients with SE, alone or in combination, was evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients with SE were included in the study, of which 22 died, for a mortality rate of 17.9%. The STESS and END-IT scores of nonsurvivors were both significantly higher than those of survivors (median STESS 4 vs. 2, p = 0.003; median END-IT 3 vs. 1, p < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.698 for the STESS and 0.852 for the END-IT, and the cutoff values were 4 and 3, respectively. The AUC of the END-IT with the optimal cutoff value was larger than that of the STESS (p = 0.024). The sensitivity and specificity of combining the STESS and END-IT by the serial method (STESS ≥ 4∩END-IT ≥ 3) were 0.50 and 0.95, respectively, and the specificity was significantly higher than the STESS or END-IT (both p's < 0.001). The sensitivity and specificity of combining the STESS and END-IT by the parallel method (STESS ≥ 4⋃END-IT ≥ 3) were 0.91 and 0.53, respectively, and the sensitivity was higher than the STESS was (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicated that the combined score of the STESS and END-IT systems was a better predictor of survival of patients with SE than the scores of either the STESS system or the END-IT system alone and that combining the scores may be considered to be a new method for early identification of patients for both good and bad outcomes.

Validation of the Status epilepticus severity score (STESS) at high-complexity hospitals in Medellín, Colombia

PURPOSE

The Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) is one of the most well-known clinical scoring systems to predict mortality in status epilepticus (SE). The objective of this study was to validate STESS in a Colombian population.

METHOD

We evaluated historical data of adult patients (age ≥16 years) with a clinical or electroencephalographic diagnosis of SE admitted between 2014 and 2017. Prospectively, we included patients admitted from January to June of 2018. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC)-analysis, determination of best cutoff values, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were performed.

RESULTS

The sample was 395 patients, with in-hospital mortality of 16.8 %. The area under the ROC curve for STESS was 0.84. A cutoff point of ≥3 produced the highest sensitivity of 84.9 % (95 % CI 73.9 %-92.5 %) and a specificity of 65.7 % (95 % CI 60.2 %-70.8 %), with a positive likelihood ratio of 2.5 and a negative likelihood ratio of 0.2.

CONCLUSIONS

STESS is a useful tool to predict mortality in patients with SE. In Medellin, Colombia, a STESS < 3 allows the identification of the patients who survive reliably. Those patients with a score <3 may have a better prognosis, and treatment with fewer side effects than anaesthetics could be suggested, always remembering the importance of the treating physician's clinical judgement.

Status epilepticus - time is brain and treatment considerations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Status epilepticus is a neurological emergency associated with high morbidity and mortality. There is a lack of robust data to guide the management of this neurological emergency beyond the initial treatment. This review examines recent literature on treatment considerations including the choice of continuous anesthetics or adjunctive anticonvulsant, the cause of the status epilepticus, and use of nonpharmacologic therapies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Status epilepticus remains undertreated and mortality persists to be unchanged over the past 30 years. New anticonvulsant choices, such as levetiracetam and lacosamide have been explored as alternative emergent therapies. Anecdotal reports on the use of other generation anticonvulsants and nonpharmacologic therapies for the treatment of refractory and super-refractory status epilepticus have been described.Finally, recent evidence has examined etiology-guided management of status epilepticus in certain patient populations, such as immune-mediated, paraneoplastic or infectious encephalitis and anoxic brain injury.

SUMMARY

Randomized clinical trials are needed to determine the role for newer generation anticonvulsants and nonpharmacologic modalities for the treatment of epilepticus remains and evaluate the long-term outcomes associated with continuous anesthetics.