Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Neurocritical Care 3/2018

01-12-2018 | Original Article

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

Authors: Dannys Rivero Rodríguez, Claudio Scherle Matamoros, Kimberly Sam, Daniela DiCapua Sacoto, Nelson Maldonado Samaniego, Yanelis Pernas

Published in: Neurocritical Care | Issue 3/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

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).

Methods

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.

Results

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).

Conclusions

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.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Neligan A, Shorvon SD. Frequency and prognosis of convulsive status epilepticus of different causes: a systematic review. Arch Neurol. 2010;67:931–40.CrossRefPubMed Neligan A, Shorvon SD. Frequency and prognosis of convulsive status epilepticus of different causes: a systematic review. Arch Neurol. 2010;67:931–40.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Rossetti AO, Logroscino G, Bromfield EB. A clinical score for prognosis of status epilepticus. Neurology. 2006;66:1736–8.CrossRefPubMed Rossetti AO, Logroscino G, Bromfield EB. A clinical score for prognosis of status epilepticus. Neurology. 2006;66:1736–8.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Leitinger M, Holler Y, Kalss G, Rohracher A, Novak HF, Hofler J, et al. Epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus (EMSE). Neurocrit Care. 2015;22:273–82.CrossRefPubMed Leitinger M, Holler Y, Kalss G, Rohracher A, Novak HF, Hofler J, et al. Epidemiology-based mortality score in status epilepticus (EMSE). Neurocrit Care. 2015;22:273–82.CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference González-Cuevas M, Santamarina E, Toledo M, Quintana M, Sala J, Sueiras M, et al. A new clinical score for the prognosis of status epilepticus in adults. Eur J Neurol. 2016;23(10):1534–40.CrossRefPubMed González-Cuevas M, Santamarina E, Toledo M, Quintana M, Sala J, Sueiras M, et al. A new clinical score for the prognosis of status epilepticus in adults. Eur J Neurol. 2016;23(10):1534–40.CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scott Med J. 1957;2(5):200–15.CrossRefPubMed Rankin J. Cerebral vascular accidents in patients over the age of 60. II. Prognosis. Scott Med J. 1957;2(5):200–15.CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Kang BS, Kim DW, Kim KK, Moon HJ, Kim YS, Kim HK, et al. Prediction of mortality and functional outcome from status epilepticus and independent external validation of STESS and EMSE scores. Crit Care. 2016;20:25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Kang BS, Kim DW, Kim KK, Moon HJ, Kim YS, Kim HK, et al. Prediction of mortality and functional outcome from status epilepticus and independent external validation of STESS and EMSE scores. Crit Care. 2016;20:25.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Pacha MS, Orellana L, Silva E, Ernst G, Pantiu F, Quiroga Narvaez J, et al. Role of EMSE and STESS scores in the outcome evaluation of status epilepticus. Epilepsy Behav. 2016;64(Pt A):140–2.CrossRefPubMed Pacha MS, Orellana L, Silva E, Ernst G, Pantiu F, Quiroga Narvaez J, et al. Role of EMSE and STESS scores in the outcome evaluation of status epilepticus. Epilepsy Behav. 2016;64(Pt A):140–2.CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Trinka E, Cock H, Hesdorffer D, Rossetti AO, Scheffer IE, Shinnar S, et al. A definition and classification of status epilepticus—report of the ILAE Task Force on Classification of Status Epilepticus. Epilepsia. 2015;56(10):1515–23.CrossRefPubMed Trinka E, Cock H, Hesdorffer D, Rossetti AO, Scheffer IE, Shinnar S, et al. A definition and classification of status epilepticus—report of the ILAE Task Force on Classification of Status Epilepticus. Epilepsia. 2015;56(10):1515–23.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Leitinger M, Beniczky S, Rohracher A, Gardella E, Kalss G, Qerama E, et al. Salzburg consensus criteria for non-convulsive status epilepticus—approach to clinical application. Epilepsy Behav. 2015;49:158–63.CrossRefPubMed Leitinger M, Beniczky S, Rohracher A, Gardella E, Kalss G, Qerama E, et al. Salzburg consensus criteria for non-convulsive status epilepticus—approach to clinical application. Epilepsy Behav. 2015;49:158–63.CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of impaired consciousness and coma: a practical scale. Lancet. 1974;13–2(7872):81–4.CrossRef Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of impaired consciousness and coma: a practical scale. Lancet. 1974;13–2(7872):81–4.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Commission on Epidemiology and Prognosis, International League Against Epilepsy. Guidelines for epidemiologic studies on epilepsy. Epilepsia. 1993;34:592–6.CrossRef Commission on Epidemiology and Prognosis, International League Against Epilepsy. Guidelines for epidemiologic studies on epilepsy. Epilepsia. 1993;34:592–6.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Claassen J, Lokin JK, Fitzsimmons BF, Mendelsohn FA, Mayer SA. Predictors of functional disability and mortality after status epilepticus. Neurology. 2002;58(1):139–42.CrossRefPubMed Claassen J, Lokin JK, Fitzsimmons BF, Mendelsohn FA, Mayer SA. Predictors of functional disability and mortality after status epilepticus. Neurology. 2002;58(1):139–42.CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Belluzzo M, Furlanis G, Stragapede L. Predictors of functional disability at hospital discharge after status epilepticus. Epilepsy Res. 2015;110:179–82.CrossRefPubMed Belluzzo M, Furlanis G, Stragapede L. Predictors of functional disability at hospital discharge after status epilepticus. Epilepsy Res. 2015;110:179–82.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Rossetti AO, Hurwitz S, Logroscino G, Bromfield EB. Prognosis of status epilepticus: role of aetiology, age, and consciousness impairment at presentation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006;77(5):611–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rossetti AO, Hurwitz S, Logroscino G, Bromfield EB. Prognosis of status epilepticus: role of aetiology, age, and consciousness impairment at presentation. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 2006;77(5):611–5.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Chin RF, Neville BG, Scott RC. A systematic review of the epidemiology of status epilepticus. Eur J Neurol. 2004;11(12):800–10.CrossRefPubMed Chin RF, Neville BG, Scott RC. A systematic review of the epidemiology of status epilepticus. Eur J Neurol. 2004;11(12):800–10.CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Rossetti AO, Logroscino G, Milligan TA, Michaelides C, Ruffieux C, Bromfield EB. Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS): a tool to orient early treatment strategy. J Neurol. 2008;255(10):1561–6.CrossRefPubMed Rossetti AO, Logroscino G, Milligan TA, Michaelides C, Ruffieux C, Bromfield EB. Status Epilepticus Severity Score (STESS): a tool to orient early treatment strategy. J Neurol. 2008;255(10):1561–6.CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Sutter R, Kaplan PW, Rüegg S. Independent external validation of the status epilepticus severity score. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(12):e475–9.CrossRefPubMed Sutter R, Kaplan PW, Rüegg S. Independent external validation of the status epilepticus severity score. Crit Care Med. 2013;41(12):e475–9.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Leitinger M, Kalss G, Rohracher A, Pilz G, Novak H, Höfler J, Deak I, et al. Predicting outcome of status epilepticus. Epilepsy Behav. 2015;49:126–30.CrossRefPubMed Leitinger M, Kalss G, Rohracher A, Pilz G, Novak H, Höfler J, Deak I, et al. Predicting outcome of status epilepticus. Epilepsy Behav. 2015;49:126–30.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Giovannini G, Monti G, Tondelli M, Marudi A, Valzania F, Leitinger M, et al. Mortality, morbidity and refractoriness prediction in status epilepticus: comparison of STESS and EMSE scores. Seizure. 2017;46:31–7.CrossRefPubMed Giovannini G, Monti G, Tondelli M, Marudi A, Valzania F, Leitinger M, et al. Mortality, morbidity and refractoriness prediction in status epilepticus: comparison of STESS and EMSE scores. Seizure. 2017;46:31–7.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Evaluation of STESS, mRSTESS, and EMSE to Predict High Disability and Mortality at Hospital Discharge in Ecuadorian Patients with Status Epilepticus
Authors
Dannys Rivero Rodríguez
Claudio Scherle Matamoros
Kimberly Sam
Daniela DiCapua Sacoto
Nelson Maldonado Samaniego
Yanelis Pernas
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Neurocritical Care / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 1541-6933
Electronic ISSN: 1556-0961
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12028-018-0549-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

Neurocritical Care 3/2018 Go to the issue