Search

Purpose: Little 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., Methods: We 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., Results: Fourty-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., Conclusions: CKD, 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., (Copyright © 2018 British Epilepsy Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Competing requirements for organ perfusion may call for antagonistic strategies such as fluid replacement or high positive end-expiratory pressure. We recently proposed an intensive lung donor treatment protocol that nearly tripled lung procurement rates and validated it in a multicentre study. The next step was to evaluate the impact of our proposal on the other organ grafts recovered from lung donors and on the recipients' outcome after transplantation of those grafts., Methods: A quasi-experimental study was conducted in six Spanish hospitals during 2013 (2010-12 was historical control). Organ donor management was led by a trained and experienced intensive care staff., Results: A total of 618 actual donors after brain death (DBDs) were included, 453 DBDs in the control period (annual average 151) and 165 in the protocol period. No baseline differences were found between the periods. Heart, liver, kidney and pancreas retrieval rates were similar in both periods, and heart, liver, kidney and pancreas recipients' survival at 3 months showed no differences between both periods., Conclusions: Our lung donor treatment protocol is safe for other grafts obtained from donors undergoing these procedures with the aim of increasing lungs available for transplantation. It has no negative impact on the recovery rates of other grafts or on early survival of heart, liver, pancreas or kidney recipients., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery. All rights reserved.)