ArticleJournal of neurology2018
The discriminative value of blood gas analysis parameters in the differential diagnosis of transient disorders of consciousness.
Article in Journal of neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Autonomic, Endocrine, and Inflammation Profiles in Functional Neurological Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.The Journal of neuropsychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2022Pooled it
- Association of serum bicarbonate with 28-day and 90-day mortality in patients with epilepsy and concurrent sepsis: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in neurology · 2025Article
- Causal link between oxidative stress and epilepsy: A two-sample Mendelian randomization study.Brain and behavior · 2024Article
- Development and validation of a peripheral cell ratio and lactate score for differentiating status epilepticus from prolonged psychogenic nonepileptic seizures.Epilepsia open · 2023Article
- Prehospital lactate levels in blood as a seizure biomarker: A multi-center observational study.Epilepsia · 2021Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimThe differentiation between epileptic and non-epileptic episodes can be challenging. Our aim was to compare lactate, anion gap (AG), bicarbonate and the Denver Seizure Score (DSS) as point-of-care test (POCT) markers for episodes of transient alterations of consciousness.
methodsThe blood serum parameters were drawn at arrival in the emergency department (ED) within 2 h of the episode. After calculating AG and DSS values, the four parameters were compared retrospectively between patients with generalized tonic-clonic seizures (GTCS) (n = 165) and patients with other disorders of consciousness [syncopes (n = 43), and psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (n = 15)]. Additionally, we compared all values among men and women.
resultsIn GTCS patients, all four parameters differed significantly compared to non-epileptic episode patients (p < 0.001). Serum lactate showed significant additional benefit over the remaining values, with an AUC of 0.947 (95% CI 0.92-0.975) and a high sensitivity and specificity for an optimal cut-off value of 2.45 mmol/l. For DSS, the AUC was 0.857 (95% CI 0.808-0.906; cut-off: 0.35), and for AG 0.836 (95% CI 0.783-0.889; cut-off: 12.45 mmol/l). In the case of serum bicarbonate, the AUC was 0.831 (95% CI 0.775-0.886; cut-off: 22.75 mmol/l). In the sex-dependent comparison, the results were similar. Men showed more significant differences in the compared values than women.
conclusionsSerum lactate is best suited as POCT marker in the differential diagnosis of epileptic and non-epileptic episodes and is superior to AG, DSS and bicarbonate. The differences among sexes may pose a challenge in their implementation and interpretation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29987588What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.