| Literature DB >> 28028790 |
Gayane Harutyunyan1, Larissa Hauer2, Martin W Dünser3, Anush Karamyan1, Tobias Moser1, Slaven Pikija1, Markus Leitinger1, Helmut F Novak1, Eugen Trinka1, Johann Sellner4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Early recognition and treatment of autoimmune encephalitis (AE) has become an essential issue in clinical practice. However, little is known about patients with deteriorating conditions and the need for intensive care treatment. Here, we aimed to characterize underlying aetiologies, clinical symptoms, reasons for intensive care admission, and mortality of critically ill patients with AE.Entities:
Keywords: Autoimmune encephalitis; Immune-mediated; Intensive care unit; Mortality; Status epilepticus
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28028790 PMCID: PMC5524849 DOI: 10.1007/s12028-016-0370-7
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Neurocrit Care ISSN: 1541-6933 Impact factor: 3.210
Fig. 1Patient selection flowchart. ICU intensive care unit, AE autoimmune encephalitis, CSF cerebrospinal fluid, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, NMDA-R N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor, IgG immunoglobulin G, VGKC voltage-gated potassium channel-complex, CV2/CRMP5 collapsin response mediator protein 5, AMPA-R α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor
Fig. 2Temporal distribution of neurological intensive care unit (neuro-ICU) admissions in patients with autoimmune encephalitis. Note the columns represent absolute numbers, e.g., 3 patients in each subgroup for year 2013
Demographic and clinical characteristics of critically ill patients with autoimmune encephalitis
| Type of antibodies | Number ( | Sex | Reason for ICU admission ( | MRI changes ( | Abnormal EEG ( | Inflammatory CSFa ( | Malignancy ( | Need for MV ( | Death ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| VGKCc | 5 | M4 | SE = 4, RF = 1 | LE = 3, | 3 | 2 | Pancreatic Ca = 1 | 1 | 1 |
| NMDAR | 5 | F4 | SE = 3, RF = Coma = 1 | LE = 2, | 4 | 0 | Ovarian teratoma = 4 | 0 | 1 |
| AMPAR | 1 | M | Delirium | LE | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| CV2/CRMP | 1 | M | Delirium | N | 1 | 0 | SCC lung = 1 | 1 | 0 |
| Ma1/Ma2 | 1 | M | SE | LA | 1 | 0 | Seminoma = 1 | 0 | 0 |
| No antibody | 14 | M7 | SE = 6, RF = Delirium = 2, Sepsis = Coma = Progressive ataxia = hemiparesis = 1 | LE = 2, EL = 4, NSC = 4, LA = 2 | 9 | 9 | Ovarian teratoma = 1, Lung CA = 1, Prostate Aca = 2, CRS = 1, CNS lymphoma = 1 | 4 | 3 |
VGKC-c voltage-gated potassium channel-complex antibody, NMDA-R N-methyl-d-aspartate receptor, AMPA-R α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptor, SE status epilepticus, RF respiratory failure, MRI magnetic resonance imaging, EEG electroencephalography, CSF cerebrospinal fluid, ICU intensive care unit, LE limbic encephalitis, EL extra-limbic, NSC non-specific changes, LA limbic atrophy, N normal, M male, F female, Ca cancer, Aca adenocarcinoma, SCC small cell cancer, CRC colorectal cancer
aCSF was considered inflammatory if at least 2 of the following criteria were met
Pleocytosis (≥5 white cells/ml)
Elevated IgG index (>0.7)
Increased protein concentration (≥70 mg/dl)
Oligoclonal bands
Comparison of survivors versus non-survivors
| Parameter | Total ( | Survivors ( | Non-survivors ( |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age at admission (years) | 55 (24) | 72 (23) | 50 (29) | 0.006 |
| Male gender [ | 16 (59.3) | 11 (50) | 5 (100) | 0.054 |
| Charlson’s comorbidity index | 3 (3) | 2 (2) | 8 (5.5) | 0.001 |
| Associated tumors [ | 14 (51.8) | 9 (40.9) | 5 (100) | 0.041 |
| SAPS II | 25 (22) | 20 (18.3) | 48 (30.5) | 0.006 |
| TISS-28 | 28 (6) | 28 (6.5) | 29 (7.5) | 0.8 |
| Noninvasive mechanical ventilation [ | 6 (22.2) | 2 (9.1) | 4 (80) | 0.004 |
| Invasive mechanical ventilation [ | 4 (14.8) | 2 (91) | 2 (40) | 0.1 |
| Plasma exchange [ | 12 (44.4) | 11 (50) | 1 (20) | 0.2 |
| Vasopressor administration [ | 17 (63) | 15 (68.2) | 2 (40) | 0.2 |
| Length of ICU stay (days) | 5 (29) | 5 (18.5) | 15 (46) | 0.04 |
All data are given as median values with interquartile range in parentheses, unless otherwise specified
CCI Charlson’s comorbidity index, SAPS simplified acute physiology score, TISS therapeutic intervention scoring system, ICU intensive care unit
Fig. 3Survival curve of study patients. Survival curve (solid line) with 95% confidence intervals (dotted line) with the number at risk along the x axis