ReviewFrontiers in neurology
Anesthetics in status epilepticus: does one size fits it all?-A scoping review on titration goals, timing, and patient selection.
Review in Frontiers in neurology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Status epilepticus (SE) is a neurological emergency with significant morbidity and mortality. Refractory status epilepticus (RSE) occurs in 20-30% of cases and may require treatment escalation to continuously administered intravenous anesthetic drugs (CIVAD). Despite widespread use, fundamental questions remain unresolved regarding optimal anesthetic management. This narrative scoping review examines CIVAD use in non-anoxic adult SE, focusing on three critical questions: What is the optimal titration goal? When should CIVADs be initiated and discontinued? Which patients benefit from CIVAD therapy? Regarding titration targets, current evidence does not support burst suppression as superior to seizure cessation for most RSE patients. Regarding timing, studies examining first- or second-line CIVAD administration have shown conflicting results, although a delayed initiation when used as a third-line treatment is associated with worse outcomes. Patient selection remains particularly challenging, as limited evidence supports aggressive CIVAD use in refractory nonconvulsive SE (NCSE) without coma or focal motor SE, whereas individualized approaches appear necessary for high-risk populations, such as NCSE with coma. The available evidence consists primarily of observational studies with inherent limitations. CIVAD therapy requires individualized decision-making based on SE type, patient characteristics, and etiology rather than standardized protocols. Future research should focus on prospective studies, advanced EEG analytics, and identification of robust biomarkers to enable precision medicine approaches in RSE management.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.