高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

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

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Guangzhou Univ Chinese Med, Neurol Dept, Affiliated Hosp 2, Guangzhou, Peoples R China [2]Univ Libre Bruxelles, Hop Univ Bruxelles, Hop Erasme, Serv Neurol, B-1070 Brussels, Belgium [3]Yale Univ, Neurol Dept, Sch Med, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: Status epilepticus Mortality Critical care Severity scores Systemic illness

摘要:
BackgroundCurrent 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.MethodsThis 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.ResultsBetween 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.ConclusionsSTESS 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.

基金:
语种:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院(CAS)分区:
出版当年[2022]版:
大类 | 1 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 危重病医学
最新[2025]版:
大类 | 1 区 医学
小类 | 2 区 危重病医学
JCR分区:
出版当年[2021]版:
Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE
最新[2023]版:
Q1 CRITICAL CARE MEDICINE

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2021版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2020版] 出版后一年[2022版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Guangzhou Univ Chinese Med, Neurol Dept, Affiliated Hosp 2, Guangzhou, Peoples R China [2]Univ Libre Bruxelles, Hop Univ Bruxelles, Hop Erasme, Serv Neurol, B-1070 Brussels, Belgium
共同第一作者:
通讯作者:
通讯机构: [2]Univ Libre Bruxelles, Hop Univ Bruxelles, Hop Erasme, Serv Neurol, B-1070 Brussels, Belgium [3]Yale Univ, Neurol Dept, Sch Med, New Haven, CT 06520 USA
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:2022 今日访问量:0 总访问量:648 更新日期:2024-07-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 广东省中医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:广州市越秀区大德路111号