Epidemiology-based Mortality Score In Status Epilepticus Research Articles

Periodic discharges and status epilepticus: A critical reappraisal

ObjectivePeriodic Discharges (PDs) in Status Epilepticus (SE) are historically related to negative outcome, and the Epidemiology-based Mortality Score in SE (EMSE) identifies PDs as an EEG feature associated with unfavorable prognosis. However, supportive evidence is conflicting. This study aims to evaluate the prognostic significance of interictal PDs during and following SE. MethodsAll 2020–2023 non-hypoxic-ischemic SE patients with available EEG during SE were retrospectively assessed. Interictal PDs during SE (SE-PDs) and PDs occurring 24–72 h after SE resolution (post-SE-PDs) were examined. In-hospital death was defined as the primary outcome. Results189 SE patients were finally included. SE-PDs were not related to outcome, while post-SE-PDs were related to poor prognosis confirmed after multiple regression analysis. EMSE global AUC was 0.751 (95%CI:0.680–0.823) and for EMSE-64 cutoff sensitivity was 0.85, specificity 0.52, accuracy 63%. We recalculated EMSE score including only post-SE-PDs. Modified EMSE (mEMSE) global AUC was 0.803 (95%CI:0.734–0.872) and for mEMSE-64 cutoff sensitivity was 0.84, specificity 0.68, accuracy 73%. ConclusionInterictal PDs during SE were not related to outcome whereas PDs persisting or appearing > 24 h after SE resolution were strongly associated to unfavorable prognosis. EMSE performed well in our cohort but considering only post-SE-PDs raised specificity and accuracy for mEMSE64 cutoff. SignificanceThis study supports the utility of differentiating between interictal PDs during and after SE for prognostic assessment.

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

ObjectiveStatus 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. MethodsNeurology 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. ResultsEighty-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). SignificanceSE 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.

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

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). 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. 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. 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.

Post-Stroke Status Epilepticus: Time of Occurrence May Be the Difference?

(1) Background: Stroke is one of the most frequent causes of status epilepticus (SE) in adults. Patients with stroke and SE have poorer prognosis than those with stroke alone. We described characteristics and prognosis of early- and late-onset post-stroke SE (PSSE). (2) Methods: We retrospectively analyzed consecutive stroke patients who experienced a first SE between August 2012 and April 2021, comparing clinical characteristics, stroke, and SE features between early- versus late-onset SE in relation to patients' outcome. (3) Results: Forty stroke patients experienced PSSE. Fourteen developed an early-onset SE (35%) and twenty-six a late-onset SE (65%). Early-onset SE patients had a slightly higher NIHSS score at admission (6.9 vs. 6.0; p = 0.05). Early-onset SE was more severe than late-onset, according to STESS (Status Epilepticus Severity Score) (3.5 vs. 2.8; p = 0.05) and EMSE (Epidemiology-based Mortality score in Status Epilepticus) score (97.0 vs. 69.5; p = 0.04); furthermore, it had a significant impact on disability at 3-month and 1-year follow-up (p = 0.03 and p = 0.02). SE recurrence and seizures relapse were observed mainly in cases of late-onset SE. (4) Conclusions: Early-onset SE seems to be associated with higher disability in short- and long-term follow-up as possible expression of severe acute brain damage.

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

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.Graphical abstract

Machine learning validation through decision tree analysis of the Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus.

This study was undertaken to validate the accuracy of the Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) in predicting the risk of death at 30 days in a large cohort of patients with status epilepticus (SE) using a machine learning system. We included consecutive patients with SE admitted from 2013 to 2021 at Modena Academic Hospital. A decision tree analysis was performed using the 30-day mortality as a dependent variable and the EMSE predictors as input variables. We evaluated the accuracy of EMSE in predicting 30-day mortality using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC ROC), with 95% confidence interval (CI). We performed a subgroup analysis on nonhypoxic SE. A total of 698 patients with SE were included, with a 30-day mortality of 28.9% (202/698). The mean EMSE value in the entire population was 57.1 (SD=36.3); it was lower in surviving compared to deceased patients (47.1, SD=31.7 vs. 81.9, SD=34.8; p< .001). The EMSE was accurate in predicting 30-day mortality, with an AUC ROC of .782 (95% CI=.747-.816). Etiology was the most relevant predictor, followed by age, electroencephalogram (EEG), and EMSE comorbidity group B. The decision tree analysis using EMSE variables correctly predicted the risk of mortality in 77.9% of cases; the prediction was accurate in 85.7% of surviving and in 58.9% of deceased patients within 30 days after SE. In nonhypoxic SE, the most relevant predictor was age, followed by EEG, and EMSE comorbidity group B; the prediction was correct in 78.9% of all cases (89.6% in survivors and 46.1% in nonsurvivors). This validation study using a machine learning analysis shows that the EMSE is a valuable prognostic tool, and appears particularly accurate and effective in identifying patients with 30-day survival, whereas its performance in predicting 30-day mortality is lower and needs to be further improved.

Development and Validation of a Nomogram Based on the Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) Parameters to Predict 30-day Mortality in Status Epilepticus.

To develop a nomogram using the parameters of the Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) and to evaluate its accuracy compared with the EMSE alone in the prediction of 30-day mortality in patients with status epilepticus (SE). We included a cohort of patients with SE aged ≥ 21years admitted from 2013 to 2021. Regression coefficients from the multivariable logistic regression model were used to generate a nomogram predicting the risk of 30-day mortality. Discrimination of the nomogram was evaluated using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUCROC) with 95% confidence interval. Internal validation was performed by bootstrap resampling. Among 698 patients with SE, the 30-day mortality rate was 28.9% (202 of 698). On the multivariable analysis, all EMSE parameters (except for the comorbidity group including metastatic solid tumor or AIDS) were associated with a significantly higher risk of 30-day mortality and were included in the nomogram. The discriminatory capability of the nomogram with bootstrap resampling (5000 resamples) had an AUCROC of 0.830 (95% confidence interval 0.798-0.862). Conversely, the AUCROC of the EMSE was 0.777 (95% confidence interval 0.742-0.813). Thus, the probability that a patient who died within 30days from SE had a higher score than a patient who survived was 83%, indicating good discriminatory power of the nomogram. Conversely, the risk predicted using the EMSE alone was 77%. The nomogram was well calibrated. A nomogram based on EMSE parameters appears superior to the EMSE in predicting the risk of 30-day mortality after SE. The discrimination and calibration of the nomogram shows a better predictive accuracy than the EMSE alone.

Elderly patients with nonconvulsive status epilepticus: Clinical-EEG data, hospital mortality, STESS and EMSE

Purpose To assess the clinical-EEG aspects, characterization of subtypes, relationships with prognostic scales and the occurrence of death in elderly patients in the acute phase of nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE).Methodology Clinical variables, EEG data, Status epilepticus severity score (STESS), and the Epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus (EMSE) were related to the death of 96 patients who were over 60 years old, with NCSE.Results NCSE with coma was observed in 31 patients (19 non-subtle and 12 “subtle” SE) and focal NCSE with impairment of consciousness in 65 cases. There were no significant EEG differences according to the type of NCSE. Higher STESS scores occurred in the comatose NCSE patients when compared to those with focal NCSE and impairment of consciousness (4.8 ± 1.2 vs 3.7 ± 1.2; T-Test; p<0.001). It was observed that 25 (26%) elderly died, with a mean survival time of 19.3 days. Elderly people with a higher risk of death are those diagnosed with NCSE with coma (HR 2.76; 95% CI 1.15–6.65; p = 0.023), with STESS≥3 (HR 16.0; CI 1.77–45.08; p = 0.014), with EMSE≥64 (HR 3.67; CI 1.54–8.72; p = 0.003), and those with no history of recurrent SE (HR 6.80; CI 1.42–32.64; p = 0.017), in Cox regression.Conclusion The ictal EEG patterns did not distinguish the subtypes of NCSE. Thirty-day mortality rate was high in elderly patients with NCSE. The clinical variables are related to prognosis. Mortality in the elderly was associated with comatose NCSE patients, with STESS≥3, with EMSE≥64, and no history of recurrent SE.

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

ObjectiveThe 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). MethodsWe 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. ResultsThe 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). ConclusionOur 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.

Outcome of status epilepticus and the predictive value of the EMSE and STESS scores: A prospective study

PurposeTo assess the short-term outcome of status epilepticus (SE) and test the Epidemiology-based Mortality score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) and the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) performance in outcome prediction. MethodsConsecutive adults with SE in the Kuopio University Hospital emergency department were recruited between March 23 and December 31, 2015. The one-month outcome was assessed by a combined phone interview and medical record review using the Glasgow Outcome Scale-Extended. The prognostic performance of the EMSE-EAC (EMSE using the combination of etiology, age and comorbidity) and STESS were statistically evaluated. ResultsWe recorded 151 SE episodes in 137 patients, of whom 47 had a first-time epileptic event (seizure or SE). Of the SE episodes, 9.0% resulted in death, 31.6% in functional decline. For mortality prediction, the AUCs of the EMSE-EAC and STESS were 0.790 (95% CI: 0.633–0.947) and 0.736 (95% CI: 0.559–0.914), respectively. The optimal cutoff points were ≥ 34 for the EMSE-EAC and ≥ 4 for STESS. Negative predictive values for mortality using the EMSE-EAC-34 and STESS-4 were 97.5% and 96.7%, respectively. For functional decline prediction, the EMSE-EAC yielded statistically insignificant results, the STESS performance was poor (AUC = 0.621, 95% CI: 0.519–0.724). ConclusionsOver 40% of SE patients suffer adverse outcomes. The EMSE-EAC and STESS are useful in short-term mortality prediction, with a high negative predictive value. The optimized cutoff points for the EMSE-EAC and STESS were ≥ 34 and ≥ 4 for cohort, respectively.

External validation of STESS and EMSE as outcome prediction scores in an Egyptian cohort with status epilepticus

PurposeThere is a lack of data concerning the performance of the outcome prediction scores in patients with status epilepticus (SE) in developing countries. The aim of this study was to compare the predictive performances of the status epilepticus severity score (STESS) and the epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus (EMSE) and adaptation of such scoring system to be compatible with the nature of society. MethodThis is a prospective study, conducted in Egypt from the period of January 2017 to June 2018. The main outcome measure was survival versus death, on hospital discharge. The cutoff point with the best sensitivity and specificity to predict mortality was determined through a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. ResultsAmong the 144 patients with SE with a mean age of 39.3 ± 19.5 years recruited into the study, 38 patients (26.3%) died in the hospital with the survival of 99 patients while 7 patients (4.9%) were referred to other centers with an unknown outcome. Although EMSE had a bit larger area under the curve (AUC) (0.846) than STESS-3 (AUC 0.824), STESS-3 had the best performance as in-hospital death prediction score as it has a higher negative predictive value (94.6%) than that of EMSE (90.9%) in order not to miss high-risk patients. ConclusionIn the Egyptian population, STESS and EMSE are useful tools in predicting mortality outcome of SE. The STESS performed significantly better than EMSEE combinations as a mortality prediction score.

Predicting the Functional Outcome of Adult Patients with Status Epilepticus.

Patients that survive status epilepticus (SE) may suffer from neurological and cognitive deficits that cause severe disabilities. An effective scoring system for functional outcome prediction may help the clinician in making treatment decisions for SE patients. Three scoring systems, namely the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), the Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE), and the Encephalitis-Nonconvulsive Status Epilepticus-Diazepam Resistance-Image Abnormalities-Tracheal Intubation (END-IT), have been developed in the past decade to predict the outcomes of patients with SE. Our study aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of these scores in predicting the function outcomes both at and after discharge in SE patients. We retrospectively reviewed the clinical data of 55 patients admitted to our neurological intensive care unit between January 2017 and December 2017. The clinical outcomes at discharge and at last follow-up were graded using the modified Rankin Scale. Our research indicated that STESS was the most sensitive and EMSE was the most specific predictive scoring method for SE outcome prediction. On the other hand, END-IT predicted functional outcomes in SE patients poorly. We concluded that STESS and EMSE can accurately predict the functional outcomes in SE patients both at discharge and the follow-up period.

P02-T Clinical outcome and EEG patterns in superrefractory-nonconvulsive status epilepticus- single centre experience

Background Nonconvulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) is a life threatening condition with very high mortality rate. The diagnosis is mainly based on electroencephalograpy (EEG). The aim was to study the EEG findings and epidemiology of superrefractory NCSE (SR-NCSE) in our center. Material and methods A retrospective database was compiled from patient files between 2013 and 2018. From 150 status epilepticus patients 13 were found to have SR-NCSE. EEG was evaluated ac-cording to the Salzburg Consensus Criteria. The following parameters were collected: status epilepticus severity score (STESS) and epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus (EMSE), time until the diagnosis and clinical outcome. Results From the SE patients 8.6% had SR- NCSE, 77% of them female. The average age was 71.4 ± 21 years ( 90 30%.) The average time until the first EEG was 15.49 h, at the time of the diagnosis already in superrefractory stage. The mortality rate was very high (77%). The survivors had good outcome, modified Rankin scale 0–1. STESS and EMSE scores gave a good prediction of out-come. The 4 patients with burst-suppression pattern on EEG all died. The others had continuous epi-leptiform discharges (EDs, spikes and sharp waves). All who survived were alert or somnolent, and had an acute treatable aetiology. Only one patient had epileptic seizures previously and recovered. Conclusion Most NCSE cases stay hidden, or are diagnosed already in a refractory stage. Using STESS and EMSE scores helps to predict the outcome. Surveillance and education may improve the outcome and diagnosis of NCSE.

External validation of the epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus in an American intensive care population

IntroductionAlthough overall mortality of status epilepticus is high, baseline patient characteristics and co-morbidities may be helpful to predict outcomes and shape treatment decisions. Two previously published scoring systems exist to predict outcomes: the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) and the Epidemiology-based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE). However, a comparison of the two scores has not previously been completed in an American intensive care unit. We hypothesize that both scores will adequately predict the primary outcome of in-hospital death, but that the EMSE may more accurately predict functional outcomes, and significantly impact treatment decisions for both clinicians and families. MethodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of all cases of status epilepticus admitted to the Neuro-Critical Care Unit (NCCU) at the Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center from 6/1/2014 – 8/31/2015. We collected data on age, comorbidities, EEG findings, and seizure history. The primary outcome measured was in-hospital death; secondary outcomes included length of stay in the NCCU, placement of a tracheostomy and/or a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy upon discharge, and discharge location were used as surrogate markers for outcome severity. A sensitivity and specificity analysis was carried out, in addition to a student’s t-test for a comparison of the two scores. ANOVA was completed to compare secondary outcomes ResultsForty-six patients were admitted to the NCCU for management of status epilepticus during June 2014 and January 2016, thirteen of which experienced in-hospital death. The median age of the sample was 60, with approximately half of the sample (52.63%) having 3 or more comorbidities. The sensitivity of both EMSE and STESS were very high (100% and 90% respectively); however, the specificities were very low (28.6% and 42.9% respectively). A student’s t-test between those who experienced in-hospital death and those who did not was only significant for EMSE at the p < 0.1 level (p = 0.055). Additionally, mean EMSE scores but not STESS scores, were significantly higher (p < 0.001) for those patients who were discharged to skilled nursing facilities or with hospice than compared to those who were discharged to home or to acute inpatient rehabilitation. ConclusionsThe EMSE and STESS may be useful to predict outcomes of status epilepticus in populations with few comorbid conditions, but are less helpful when patients have multiple medical problems. Secondly, while neither score may be specific enough to differentiate for the primary outcome of death, their utility may be helpful to predict secondary outcomes that strongly affect clinical decisions. Based on these results, we believe a prospective trial of EMSE and STESS should be carried out to obtain more information on their utility, especially in American patients who may have more relevant comorbidities than in other countries.

Prognostic scores in status epilepticus—a critical appraisal

Currently, there are 4 published scales evaluating status epilepticus (SE) prognosis: the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), the Epidemiology-based Mortality score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE), the modified STESS (mSTESS), and the Encephalitis Nonconvulsive Status Epilepticus Diazepam Resistence Imaging Tracheal Intubation (END-IT) score. The first prognostic score published for SE, the STESS, is a simple and practical scale that evaluates patient prognosis upon admission and is used widely to predict the outcome and stratify patients. Another scale, which was developed based on large epidemiologic studies, the EMSE, is more easily adapted to different regions around the world when assessing individual risk and stratifying patients in interventional studies. The mSTESS was created by adding the modified Rankin Scale (mRS) to the STESS, which decreases the ceiling effect and increases the mortality prediction capabilities of the STESS. The END-IT is the only prognostic scale assessing functional outcome and is comprehensively simple and satisfyingly accurate. Evaluating the limitations of each of these scales aids in the exploration and advancement of SE prognostic scales, thereby facilitating better clinical interventions and scientific research.

Factors associated with refractoriness and outcome in an adult status epilepticus cohort

PurposeSeveral multinational prospective registers have shown that a significant proportion of status epilepticus (SE) patients are not treated in line with international guidelines. The aim of this study was to assess quality of treatment and to identify factors associated with refractoriness and outcome in a cohort of adult SE patients in Norway. Methods151 patients treated in Oslo University Hospital from 2001 to 2017 were included. One SE-episode was selected per patient and variables related to the patient, SE-episode, treatment and outcome entered into a database. Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) and Epidemiology-based Mortality Score in SE (EMSE) were calculated for each episode. Results68% (n = 102) of SE-episodes were responsive, 20% (n = 30) refractory and 12% (n = 19) superrefractory. Mortality was 9%, with a significant difference between responsive episodes (1%) and refractory (superrefractory included) episodes (24%), p < 0.001. 86% of patients received a benzodiazepine as 1st antiepileptic drug. Multivariate analysis showed that non-convulsive SE in coma was significantly associated with refractoriness (p = 0.04), while focal non-convulsive SE without coma was associated with responsiveness (p = 0.03). Younger age was associated with superrefractoriness (p = 0.02). Regarding outcome, EMSE-EtiologyAgeComorbiditiesEEG (EACE)≥64 (p = 0.02) and use of vasopressors (p = 0.03) were associated with a worsening of the modified Rankin scale at discharge. STESS was only associated with outcome in univariate analysis. ConclusionIn this cohort in which international guidelines for treatment of SE were well followed, semiology of the SE was found to be the most important determinant of refractoriness, and the new clinical scoring system EMSE-EACE was robustly associated with outcome.

Evaluation of STESS, mRSTESS, and EMSE to Predict High Disability and Mortality at Hospital Discharge in Ecuadorian Patients with Status Epilepticus.

Adequate identification of the severity of status epilepticus (SE) contributes to individualized treatment. The scales most widely used for this purpose are: Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS), Epidemiology-Based Mortality Score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) and modified Rankin Scale STESS (mRSTESS). The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of the STESS, EMSE and mRSTESS scales to predict high disability and hospital mortality at discharge (HD/HM). A prospective study was conducted in which total of 41 patients were registered from November 2015 to January 2018 at Eugenio Espejo Hospital. Clinical variables such as age, sex, clinical status at the beginning of the SE, initial symptom of SE, as well as the STESS, mRSTESS and EMSE variant scales were studied at the time of the diagnosis of SE. A total of 41 patients were evaluated, of which 8 (19.5%) had HD at hospital discharge and died 13 (31.7%) during their care. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to predict HD/HM was 0.71 (95% CI (confidence interval) 0.55-0.87), 0.81 (95% CI 0.67-0.94), 0.89 (95% CI 0.79-0.99), 0.90 (95% CI 0.80-1.0), 0.89 (95% CI 0.78-0.99) for the STESS, mRSTESS, EMSE-EAC (etiology, age, comorbidities), EMSE-EACEG (etiology, age, comorbidities, electroencephalography) and EMSE-ECLEG (etiology, age, level of consciousness at pre-treatment, electroencephalography), variants of EMSE, respectively. The binary logistic regression demonstrated how the following cut-off points were determined: STESS OR (odd ratio) 4.80 (p = 0.02), mRSTESS OR 7.89 (p = 0.00), EMSE-EAC OR 22.16 (p = 0.00), EMSE-ECLEG OR 18.00 (p = 0.00), EMSE-EACEG OR 14 (p = 0.00). All of the evaluated scales (STESS, mRSTESS, and EMSE) were shown to be useful in predicting HD/HM. EMSE was observed to be the most effective of the scales, with relative similarities among the variants.

Clinical utility of EMSE and STESS in predicting hospital mortality for status epilepticus

PurposeTo explore the applicability of the epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus (EMSE) and the status epilepticus severity score (STESS) in predicting hospital mortality in patients with status epilepticus (SE) in western China. Furthermore, we sought to compare the abilities of the two scales to predict mortality from convulsive status epilepticus (CSE) and non-convulsive status epilepticus (NCSE). MethodPatients with epilepsy (n = 253) were recruited from the West China Hospital of Sichuan University from January 2012 to January 2016. The EMSE and STESS for all patients were calculated immediately after admission. The main outcome was in-hospital death. The predicted values were analysed using SPSS 22.0 receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. ResultOf the 253 patients with SE who were included in the study, 39 (15.4%) died in the hospital. Using STESS ≥4 points to predict SE mortality, the area under the ROC curve (AUC) was 0.724 (P < 0.05). Using EMSE ≥79 points, the AUC was 0.776 (P < 0.05). To predict mortality in NCSE, STESS ≥2 points was used and resulted in an AUC of 0.632 (P > 0.05), while EMSE ≥90 points gave an AUC of 0.666 (P > 0.05). ConclusionsThe hospital mortality rate from SE in this study was 15.4%. Those with STESS ≥4 points or EMSE ≥79 points had higher rates of SE mortality. Both STESS and EMSE are less useful predicting in-hospital mortality in NCSE compared to CSE. Furthermore, the EMSE has some advantages over the STESS.

Refractory status epilepticus: Impact of baseline comorbidity and usefulness of STESS and EMSE scoring systems in predicting mortality and functional outcome

PurposeLittle has been published on the prognostic value of the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) or the Epidemiology-based Mortality score in Status Epilepticus (EMSE) in refractory status epilepticus (RSE). We sought to analyze the prognostic value of STESS and EMSE and the impact of baseline comorbidities in mortality and functional outcome in RSE. MethodsWe designed an observational retrospective study of patients diagnosed with RSE between August 2013 and September 2017. For each patient, we analyzed prospectively recorded demographic, clinical, comorbidity, electroencephalographic, treatment, and hospital stay–related data and calculated STESS and EMSE. All variables were compared statistically between patients with good and poor functional outcome at discharge and between patients who died in hospital and those who were alive at discharge. ResultsFourty-nine patients had RSE; 35.4% died in hospital and 88% showed functional decline at discharge. Mortality was associated with baseline chronic kidney disease (CKD) (OR 19.25, p = 0.006), baseline modified Rankin scale score (mRS) (OR 3.38, p = 0.005), non-convulsive status epilepticus (NCSE) with coma (OR 11.9, p = 0.04), STESS (OR 2, p = 0.04), and EMSE (OR 1.3, p = 0.02). Functional outcome was associated with baseline mRS (OR 13.9, p = 0.02), and EMSE (OR 1.3, p = 0.02). The optimal cutoff scores for predicting mortality were 4 for STESS and 60 for EMSE. EMSE predicted functional outcome with an optimal cutoff of 40. ConclusionsCKD, NCSE with coma and STESS were associated with mortality. mRS and EMSE were associated with mortality and functional outcome. EMSE was useful for predicting functional outcome, while EMSE and STESS were useful for predicting in-hospital mortality.

Prediction of mortality using Chinese version of epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus (EMSE)

Objective To study the value of epidemiology-based mortality score, a novel scoring system, in in-hospital adult patients with status epilepticus (SE) for predicting mortality, and to compare it with the status epilepticus severity score (STESS). Methods The clinical and electroencephalography data of 54 adult patients with SE admitted from June 2013 to June 2016 were derived from a prospective SE database of Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Traditional Chinese Medicine. The outcome was defined as in-hospital death or survival at discharge. When the receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were made, the area under ROC (AUC) and the optimal cutoff value were calculated. Fisher’s linear discriminant function analysis was conducted with the outcome as dependent variable and the scores as independent variables. Results Among 54 patients with SE recruited into the study, 13 (24.10 %) died in the hospital. The ROC curve for prediction of in-hospital death based on the STESS had a AUC of 0.705 with an optimal cutoff value for discrimination (best match for both sensitivity (0.77) and specificity (0.56) to be ≥3 points. The AUC based on the EMSE was 0.800 with an optimal cutoff value for discrimination (best match for both sensitivity (0.92) and specificity (0.61) to be ≥79 points. Three elements added in combination with EMSE system (etiology-age-comorbidity, EMSE-EAC) predicted in-hospital mortality with the best match for both sensitivity (1.00) and specificity (0.56) as the optimal cutoff point was ≥32 points, and the AUC was 0.814. Four elements added in combination with EMSE system (etiology-age-comorbidity-EEG, EMSE-EACE) predicted in-hospital mortality with the best match for both sensitivity (0.77) and specificity (0.98) as the optimal cutoff point was ≥71 points with an AUC of 0.925. The AUC of EMSE-EACE was larger than that of both STESS and EMSE (Both P<0.01). Discriminant equations were found by Fisher linear discriminant analysis. The rates of accuracy of the equation for predicting patients’ prognosis were 44.44% (STESS), 62.96% (EMSE), 70.37% (EMSE-EAC) and 81.48% (EMSE-EACE) respectively, suggesting that the equations of EMSE, EMSE-EAC and EMSE-EACE have superior stability. Conclusions The EMSE is an effective clinical scoring system that focuses on individual mortality. EMSE-EACE is superior over both STESS and EMSE in the prediction of in-hospital death. Key words: Status epilepticus; Mortality; Outcome; Predictive value; Epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus; Status epilepticus severity score; Receiver-operating characteristic curves; Discriminant analysis