Raoul Sutter1,2,3,4, Gian Marco De Marchis5, Saskia Semmlack6, Peter Fuhr5, Stephan Rüegg5, Stephan Marsch6, Wendy C Ziai7, Peter W Kaplan8. 1. Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA. Raoul.Sutter@usb.ch. 2. Division of Neurosciences Critical Care, Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care Medicine and Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. Raoul.Sutter@usb.ch. 3. Clinic for Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. Raoul.Sutter@usb.ch. 4. Division of Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. Raoul.Sutter@usb.ch. 5. Division of Clinical Neurophysiology, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 6. Clinic for Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. 7. Division of Neurosciences Critical Care, Department of Anesthesiology, Critical Care Medicine and Neurology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 8. Department of Neurology, Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The use of anesthetics has been linked to poor outcome in patients with status epilepticus (SE). This association, however, may be confounded, as anesthetics are mostly administered in patients with more severe SE and critical illnesses. OBJECTIVE: To minimize treatment-selection bias, we assessed the association between continuously administered intravenous anesthetic drugs (IVADs) and outcome in SE patients by a matched two-center study design. METHODS: This cohort study was performed at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA and the University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. All consecutive adult SE patients from 2005 to 2013 were included. Odds ratios (ORs) for death and unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Score [GOS] 1-3) associated with administration of IVADs were calculated. To account for confounding by known outcome determinants (age, level of consciousness, worst seizure type, acute/fatal etiology, mechanical ventilation, and SE duration), propensity score matching and coarsened exact matching were performed in addition to multivariable regression models. RESULTS: Among 406 consecutive patients, 139 (34.2%) were treated with IVADs. Logistic regression analyses of the unmatched and matched cohorts revealed increased odds for death and unfavorable outcome in survivors who had received IVADs (unmatched: ORdeath = 3.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.47-6.60 and ORGOS1-3 = 2.51, 95% CI 1.37-4.60; propensity score matched: ORdeath = 3.29, 95% CI 1.35-8.05 and ORGOS1-3 = 2.27, 95% CI 1.02-5.06; coarsened exact matched: ORdeath = 2.19, 95% CI 1.27-3.78 and ORGOS1-3 = 3.94, 95% CI 2.12-7.32). CONCLUSION: The use of IVADs in SE is associated with death and unfavorable outcome in survivors independent of known confounders and using different statistical approaches. Randomized trials are needed to determine if these associations are biased by outcome predictors not yet identified and hence not accounted for in this study.
BACKGROUND: The use of anesthetics has been linked to poor outcome in patients with status epilepticus (SE). This association, however, may be confounded, as anesthetics are mostly administered in patients with more severe SE and critical illnesses. OBJECTIVE: To minimize treatment-selection bias, we assessed the association between continuously administered intravenous anesthetic drugs (IVADs) and outcome in SE patients by a matched two-center study design. METHODS: This cohort study was performed at the Johns Hopkins Bayview Medical Center, Baltimore, MD, USA and the University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. All consecutive adult SE patients from 2005 to 2013 were included. Odds ratios (ORs) for death and unfavorable outcome (Glasgow Outcome Score [GOS] 1-3) associated with administration of IVADs were calculated. To account for confounding by known outcome determinants (age, level of consciousness, worst seizure type, acute/fatal etiology, mechanical ventilation, and SE duration), propensity score matching and coarsened exact matching were performed in addition to multivariable regression models. RESULTS: Among 406 consecutive patients, 139 (34.2%) were treated with IVADs. Logistic regression analyses of the unmatched and matched cohorts revealed increased odds for death and unfavorable outcome in survivors who had received IVADs (unmatched: ORdeath = 3.13, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.47-6.60 and ORGOS1-3 = 2.51, 95% CI 1.37-4.60; propensity score matched: ORdeath = 3.29, 95% CI 1.35-8.05 and ORGOS1-3 = 2.27, 95% CI 1.02-5.06; coarsened exact matched: ORdeath = 2.19, 95% CI 1.27-3.78 and ORGOS1-3 = 3.94, 95% CI 2.12-7.32). CONCLUSION: The use of IVADs in SE is associated with death and unfavorable outcome in survivors independent of known confounders and using different statistical approaches. Randomized trials are needed to determine if these associations are biased by outcome predictors not yet identified and hence not accounted for in this study.
Authors: Eugen Trinka; Hannah Cock; Dale Hesdorffer; Andrea O Rossetti; Ingrid E Scheffer; Shlomo Shinnar; Simon Shorvon; Daniel H Lowenstein Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2015-09-04 Impact factor: 5.864
Authors: A O Rossetti; G Logroscino; L Liaudet; C Ruffieux; V Ribordy; M D Schaller; P A Despland; M Oddo Journal: Neurology Date: 2007-07-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Jason L Sperry; Joseph P Minei; Heidi L Frankel; Micheal A West; Brian G Harbrecht; Ernest E Moore; Ronald V Maier; Ram Nirula Journal: J Trauma Date: 2008-01
Authors: Jeannette Kadel; Sebastian Bauer; Anke M Hermsen; Ilka Immisch; Lara Kay; Karl Martin Klein; Susanne Knake; Katja Menzler; Philipp S Reif; Felix Rosenow; Adam Strzelczyk Journal: CNS Drugs Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 5.749
Authors: Eric S Rosenthal; Jordan J Elm; James Ingles; Alexander J Rogers; Thomas E Terndrup; Maija Holsti; Danny G Thomas; Lynn Babcock; Pamela J Okada; Robert H Lipsky; Joseph B Miller; Robert W Hickey; Megan E Barra; Thomas P Bleck; James C Cloyd; Robert Silbergleit; Daniel H Lowenstein; Lisa D Coles; Jaideep Kapur; Shlomo Shinnar; James M Chamberlain Journal: Neurology Date: 2021-03-23 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Daniel B Rubin; Brigid Angelini; Maryum Shoukat; Catherine J Chu; Sahar F Zafar; M Brandon Westover; Sydney S Cash; Eric S Rosenthal Journal: Brain Date: 2020-04-01 Impact factor: 15.255
Authors: Michael A Pizzi; Prasuna Kamireddi; William O Tatum; Jerry J Shih; Daniel A Jackson; William D Freeman Journal: J Intensive Care Date: 2017-08-08
Authors: Dominik Madžar; Caroline Reindl; Antje Giede-Jeppe; Tobias Bobinger; Maximilian I Sprügel; Ruben U Knappe; Hajo M Hamer; Hagen B Huttner Journal: Crit Care Date: 2018-11-21 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Marina Gaínza-Lein; Cristina Barcia Aguilar; Juan Piantino; Kevin E Chapman; Iván Sánchez Fernández; Marta Amengual-Gual; Anne Anderson; Brian Appavu; Ravindra Arya; James Nicholas Brenton; Jessica L Carpenter; Justice Clark; Raquel Farias-Moeller; William D Gaillard; Tracy A Glauser; Joshua L Goldstein; Howard P Goodkin; Linda Huh; Robert Kahoud; Kush Kapur; Yi-Chen Lai; Tiffani L McDonough; Mohamad A Mikati; Lindsey A Morgan; Anuranjita Nayak; Edward Novotny; Adam P Ostendorf; Eric T Payne; Katrina Peariso; Latania Reece; James Riviello; Kumar Sannagowdara; Tristan T Sands; Theodore Sheehan; Robert C Tasker; Dmitry Tchapyjnikov; Alejandra Vasquez; Mark S Wainwright; Angus Wilfong; Korwyn Williams; Bo Zhang; Tobias Loddenkemper Journal: Epilepsia Date: 2021-07-12 Impact factor: 6.740