ArticleChildren (Basel, Switzerland)2023
A Commentary on Electrographic Seizure Management and Clinical Outcomes in Critically Ill Children.
Article in Children (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. 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, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Continuous EEG (cEEG) monitoring is the gold standard for detecting electrographic seizures in critically ill children and the current consensus-based guidelines recommend urgent cEEG to detect electrographic seizures that would otherwise be undetected. The detection of seizures usually leads to the use of antiseizure medications, even though current evidence that treatment leads to important improvements in outcomes is limited, raising the question of whether the current strategies need re-evaluation. There is emerging evidence indicating that the presence of electrographic seizures is not associated with unfavorable neurological outcome, and thus treatment is unlikely to alter the outcomes in these children. However, a high seizure burden and electrographic status epilepticus is associated with unfavorable outcome and the treatment of status epilepticus is currently warranted. Ultimately, outcomes are more likely a function of etiology than of a direct effect of the seizures themselves. We suggest re-examining our current consensus toward aggressive treatment to abolish all electrographic seizures and recommend a tailored approach where therapeutic interventions are indicated when seizure burden breaches above a critical threshold that may be associated with adverse outcomes. Future studies should explicitly evaluate whether there is a positive impact of treating electrographic seizures or electrographic status epilepticus in order to justify continuing current approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.