1Department of Clinical Neurosciences, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CHUV), Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. 2Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois, Université de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Crit Care Med. 2015 May;43(5):1003-9. doi: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000000881.
Therapeutic coma is advocated in guidelines for management of refractory status epilepticus; this is, however, based on weak evidence. We here address the specific impact of therapeutic coma on status epilepticus outcome.
Retrospective assessment of a prospectively collected cohort.
Academic hospital.
Consecutive adults with incident status epilepticus lasting greater than or equal to 30 minutes, admitted between 2006 and 2013.
We recorded prospectively demographics, clinical status epilepticus features, treatment, and outcome at discharge and retrospectively medical comorbidities, hospital stay, and infectious complications. Associations between potential predictors and clinical outcome were analyzed using multinomial logistic regressions. Of 467 patients with incident status epilepticus, 238 returned to baseline (51.1%), 162 had new disability (34.6%), and 67 died (14.3%); 50 subjects (10.7%) were managed with therapeutic coma. Therapeutic coma was associated with poorer outcome in the whole cohort (relative risk ratio for new disability, 6.86; 95% CI, 2.84-16.56; for mortality, 9.10; 95% CI, 3.17-26.16); the effect was more important in patients with complex partial compared with generalized convulsive or nonconvulsive status epilepticus in coma. Prevalence of infections was higher (odds ratio, 3.81; 95% CI, 1.66-8.75), and median hospital stay in patients discharged alive was longer (16 d [range, 2-240 d] vs 9 d [range, 1-57 d]; p < 0.001) in subjects managed with therapeutic coma.
This study provides class III evidence that therapeutic coma is associated with poorer outcome after status epilepticus; furthermore, it portends higher infection rates and longer hospitalizations. These data suggest caution in the straightforward use of this approach, especially in patients with complex partial status epilepticus.
治疗性昏迷在难治性癫痫持续状态管理指南中被提倡;然而,这是基于薄弱的证据。我们在这里探讨治疗性昏迷对癫痫持续状态结局的具体影响。
前瞻性收集队列的回顾性评估。
学术医院。
2006 年至 2013 年间连续发生持续时间大于或等于 30 分钟的癫痫持续状态的成年患者。
我们前瞻性记录了人口统计学、临床癫痫持续状态特征、治疗和出院时的结局,并回顾性记录了医疗合并症、住院时间和感染并发症。使用多项逻辑回归分析潜在预测因素与临床结局之间的关系。467 例癫痫持续状态患者中,238 例恢复基线(51.1%),162 例有新的残疾(34.6%),67 例死亡(14.3%);50 例(10.7%)接受了治疗性昏迷治疗。在整个队列中,治疗性昏迷与较差的结局相关(新发残疾的相对风险比,6.86;95%置信区间,2.84-16.56;死亡率,9.10;95%置信区间,3.17-26.16);在昏迷的局灶性部分癫痫持续状态患者中,其效果比全面性强直阵挛或非惊厥性癫痫持续状态患者更重要。接受治疗性昏迷的患者感染率更高(优势比,3.81;95%置信区间,1.66-8.75),存活出院患者的中位住院时间更长(16 天[范围,2-240 天]与 9 天[范围,1-57 天];p < 0.001)。
这项研究提供了 III 级证据,表明治疗性昏迷与癫痫持续状态后结局较差相关;此外,它预示着更高的感染率和更长的住院时间。这些数据表明,在直接使用这种方法时应谨慎,尤其是在局灶性部分癫痫持续状态患者中。