Intubation in propofol-treated status epilepticus: a cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction The management of status epilepticus (SE) often includes endotracheal intubation with mechanical ventilation to address respiratory depression, especially in patients treated with third-line anesthetic agents such as propofol. At our center we use sub-anesthetic propofol as a first line anti-epileptic for SE without intubation. We aimed to assess the performance of our treatment algorithm and to determine whether intubation in these patients improves outcomes. Methods All adult patients with SE treated with propofol at a tertiary neuro-intensive care unit from 2015 to 2022 were identified through medical records. Survival without new neurological deficits at discharge was the primary outcome; secondary outcomes were the development of common complications. Descriptive statistics were used to assess general outcomes, and multi-variable logistic regressions were performed to compare outcomes between patients who were intubated while on propofol and those who were not, as well as to compare outcomes according to number of days kept intubated after cessation of propofol. Results We identified 162 SE patients treated with low-dose propofol, of which 44 (17%) were not intubated and 118 (83%) were. Our cohort’s survival rate was 85%, and survival without new deficits was 42%. Intubation was not associated with improved survival without new neurological deficits (OR = 1.34, 95% CI 0.372–4.831, p = 0.655) or reduction in complications. Additionally, in patients intubated for management of SE, the number of days kept intubated following cessation of propofol was associated with a decrease in survival without new neurological deficits (OR = 0.016, 95% CI 0.000–0.854, p = 0.042). Conclusion This study offers encouraging evidence that early sub-anesthetic propofol is a safe and efficient alternative to existing treatment approaches in selected patients. These patients do not require intubation: intubation fails to significantly improve outcomes, and prolonging intubation past cessation of propofol worsens outcomes. These data raise doubts as to the benefits of endotracheal intubation in SE and stress the need to limit the duration of this invasive measure.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".