Neuroanesthesia & neurocritical care
Severity scores for status epilepticus in the ICU: systemic illness also matters
Authors' conclusion
STESS and EMSE were insufficient in outcome prediction for SE patients in ICU, and EMSE was marginally better than STESS.
Study context
- Population
- Critically ill patients with SE in the ICU, 2015–2020
- Participants
- 166 patients
- Exposure
- SE scores vs systemic severity scores
- Outcome
- Prediction of in-hospital mortality and no return to baseline condition (AUC, sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, accuracy)
Methodological detailsprospectively identified cohort, single-centre, tertiary-care ICU
- Prospectively identified cohort
- Single-centre
- Tertiary-care ICU
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
In-hospital death (AUC)
| Group | AUC |
|---|---|
| Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS) | 0.58 |
| EMSE | 0.69 |
| APACHE-2 | 0.72 |
| SAPS-2 | 0.73 |
| Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) | 0.71 |
AUC
Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS)0.58
EMSE0.69
APACHE-20.72
SAPS-20.73
Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA)0.71
Observational data: associations, not effects.
Further findings
| Outcome | APACHE-2 | INCNS |
|---|---|---|
| No return to baseline condition (AUC) | ||
| AUC | 0.75 | 0.55 |
No return to baseline condition (AUC)
- APACHE-2 AUC highest, INCNS lowest
Sensitivity at specificity approaching 90%
- Sensitivity of the scores not quite acceptable
- < 40%
Multivariate logistic regression
- Best combinations of scores always included at least one systemic severity score
Original publication
Severity scores for status epilepticus in the ICU: systemic illness also matters. Crit Care. Published 16 January 2023. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →