• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

尿酸是区分反应性和难治性癫痫持续状态的有用标志物。

Uric acid is a useful marker to differentiate between responsive and refractory status epilepticus.

作者信息

Choi Jun Young, Hong Ji Man, Kim Tae Joon, Kim Byung Gon, Huh Kyoon

机构信息

Department of Brain Science, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea; Department of Neurology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea.

Department of Neurology, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea.

出版信息

Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2019 Sep;184:105454. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105454. Epub 2019 Jul 24.

DOI:10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105454
PMID:31376771
Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Early recognition of refractory status epilepticus (RSE) is essential to select an appropriate treatment strategy and is closely associated with the outcome. Only few studies of RSE biomarkers exist; hence, we investigated the serum levels of uric acid (UA), albumin, and C-reactive protein (CRP) as potential serologic biomarkers for RSE.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive status epilepticus (SE) patients who had serial conventional blood tests in a referral hospital over a period of 10 years were retrospectively analyzed. Patients with anoxic encephalopathy, renal failure, acute stroke, and myocardial infarction were excluded. RSE was defined as seizure continuing after the first- and second-line treatments. We also assessed SE severity in all included patients using the Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS). General demographics and blood test findings were compared between responsive SE and RSE patients.

RESULTS

A total of 141 patients (99 responsive and 42 refractory) were recruited from our SE registry. Compared to responsive patients, patients with RSE showed a higher STESS, lower initial albumin levels, lower initial UA levels, lower follow-up UA levels, and greater reduction of UA levels. The RSE group more frequently had acute symptomatic etiology, showed longer hospitalization, and had poorer functional outcomes compared to the responsive-SE group. All evaluated UA level parameters exhibited significant areas under the curve in receiver operating characteristic analyses, predictive of RSE. Initial UA levels, as well as changes therein, were significantly associated with RSE in multivariate logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

UA levels at initial and follow-up evaluations, and changes therein differentiated responsive SE and RSE, demonstrating the feasibility of UA serum levels as a biomarker for RSE.

摘要

目的

早期识别难治性癫痫持续状态(RSE)对于选择合适的治疗策略至关重要,且与预后密切相关。目前关于RSE生物标志物的研究较少;因此,我们研究了血清尿酸(UA)、白蛋白和C反应蛋白(CRP)水平,作为RSE潜在的血清学生物标志物。

患者与方法

回顾性分析了一家转诊医院在10年期间连续进行常规血液检查的癫痫持续状态(SE)患者。排除患有缺氧性脑病、肾衰竭、急性中风和心肌梗死的患者。RSE定义为一线和二线治疗后仍持续发作的癫痫。我们还使用癫痫持续状态严重程度评分(STESS)评估了所有纳入患者的SE严重程度。比较了反应性SE患者和RSE患者的一般人口统计学特征和血液检查结果。

结果

我们的SE登记系统共纳入了141例患者(99例反应性患者和42例难治性患者)。与反应性患者相比,RSE患者的STESS更高,初始白蛋白水平更低,初始UA水平更低,随访UA水平更低,UA水平下降幅度更大。与反应性SE组相比,RSE组急性症状性病因更为常见,住院时间更长,功能预后更差。在接受者操作特征分析中,所有评估的UA水平参数均显示出显著的曲线下面积,可预测RSE。在多因素逻辑回归分析中,初始UA水平及其变化与RSE显著相关。

结论

初始和随访评估时的UA水平及其变化可区分反应性SE和RSE,表明UA血清水平作为RSE生物标志物的可行性。

相似文献

1
Uric acid is a useful marker to differentiate between responsive and refractory status epilepticus.尿酸是区分反应性和难治性癫痫持续状态的有用标志物。
Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2019 Sep;184:105454. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2019.105454. Epub 2019 Jul 24.
2
Spectrum and Predictors of Refractory Status Epilepticus in a Developing Country.发展中国家难治性癫痫持续状态的特征和预测因素。
Can J Neurol Sci. 2017 Sep;44(5):538-546. doi: 10.1017/cjn.2017.28. Epub 2017 Apr 27.
3
Predictors of outcomes and refractoriness in status epilepticus: A prospective study.癫痫持续状态的预后及难治性预测因素:一项前瞻性研究。
Epilepsy Behav. 2017 Oct;75:158-164. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2017.07.046. Epub 2017 Sep 15.
4
Predictors and prognosis of refractory status epilepticus treated in a neurological intensive care unit.神经重症监护病房中难治性癫痫持续状态的预测因素及预后
J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2005 Apr;76(4):534-9. doi: 10.1136/jnnp.2004.041947.
5
Impact of timing of continuous intravenous anesthetic drug treatment on outcome in refractory status epilepticus.持续静脉麻醉药物治疗时机对难治性癫痫持续状态结局的影响。
Crit Care. 2018 Nov 21;22(1):317. doi: 10.1186/s13054-018-2235-2.
6
Association of seizure duration and outcome in refractory status epilepticus.难治性癫痫持续状态发作持续时间与预后的关系
J Neurol. 2016 Mar;263(3):485-91. doi: 10.1007/s00415-015-7992-0. Epub 2016 Jan 2.
7
Safety and efficacy of intravenous lacosamide for adjunctive treatment of refractory status epilepticus: a comparative cohort study.静脉注射拉考酰胺辅助治疗难治性癫痫持续状态的安全性和有效性:一项对照队列研究。
CNS Drugs. 2013 Apr;27(4):321-9. doi: 10.1007/s40263-013-0049-y.
8
A one-year prospective study of refractory status epilepticus in Modena, Italy.意大利摩德纳难治性癫痫持续状态的一年前瞻性研究。
Epilepsy Behav. 2015 Aug;49:141-5. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2015.05.022.
9
Perampanel Treatment for Refractory Status Epilepticus in a Neurological Intensive Care Unit.抗痉挛药物治疗神经重症监护病房难治性癫痫持续状态
Neurocrit Care. 2019 Aug;31(1):24-29. doi: 10.1007/s12028-019-00704-9.
10
Refractory status epilepticus: frequency, risk factors, and impact on outcome.难治性癫痫持续状态:发生率、危险因素及其对预后的影响。
Arch Neurol. 2002 Feb;59(2):205-10. doi: 10.1001/archneur.59.2.205.

引用本文的文献

1
Bipolar mania and epilepsy pathophysiology and treatment may converge in purine metabolism: A new perspective on available evidence.双相情感障碍躁狂和癫痫的病理生理学和治疗可能集中在嘌呤代谢上:对现有证据的新视角。
Neuropharmacology. 2023 Dec 15;241:109756. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropharm.2023.109756. Epub 2023 Oct 9.
2
ES-RED (Early Seizure Recurrence in the Emergency Department) Calculator: A Triage Tool for Seizure Patients.ES-RED(急诊科早期癫痫复发)计算器:一种用于癫痫患者的分诊工具。
J Clin Med. 2022 Jun 22;11(13):3598. doi: 10.3390/jcm11133598.
3
Markers in Status Epilepticus Prognosis.
癫痫持续状态预后标志物。
J Clin Neurophysiol. 2020 Sep;37(5):422-428. doi: 10.1097/WNP.0000000000000761.